Portside

Fossil fuel lobbyists coordinated with lawmakers behind the scenes and across state lines to push and shape laws that are escalating a crackdown on peaceful protests against oil and gas expansion, a new Guardian investigation reveals.

Records obtained by the Guardian show that lobbyists working for major North American oil and gas companies were key architects of anti-protest laws that increase penalties and could lead to non-violent environmental and climate activists being imprisoned up to 10 years.

Emails between fossil fuel lobbyists and lawmakers in Utah, West Virginia, Idaho and Ohio suggest a nationwide strategy to deter people frustrated by government failure to tackle the climate crisis from peacefully disrupting the expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure by enacting tough laws with lengthy jail sentences.

“Draft bill attached,” wrote a lobbyist representing two influential fossil fuel trade groups to the lead counsel for the West Virginia state energy committee in January 2020.

The law, which carries a maximum 10-year prison sentence, was later used to charge at least eight peaceful climate protesters including six senior citizens.

Amid ongoing record oil and gas expansion in the US, activists say they have turned to protests and non-violent civil disobedience such as blocking roads and chaining themselves to trees, machinery and equipment as a way to slow down construction, raise public awareness, and press for more urgent climate action by governments and corporations.

Police arrest environmental activists protesting the Line 3 oil sands pipeline near Itasca state park in Minnesota on 7 June 2021. Photograph: Kerem Yücel/AFP/Getty Images

Civil disobedience is a form of political protest that involves breaking the law in a planned, symbolic way – which activists and rights experts say is part of the bedrock of a democratic society and in the tradition of civil rights movements.

The months-long investigation by the Guardian found that companies and lawmakers sought to increase the threat of criminal action against activists to protect oil and gas expansion – even as deadly and destructive extreme weather events hit communities nationwide.

Last year was the hottest on record, and wildfires, baking temperatures, deadly floods and rising sea levels struck communities across North America – and the rest of the world. Under the Biden administration, the US has handed out more than 1,450 new oil and gas licences, accounting for half of the total globally, and 20% more licences than those issued by Donald Trump, who has promised to “drill, baby, drill” should he return to the White House.

The findings from dozens of freedom of information requests suggest that the right to peaceful protest is under attack in the US – much like in other major democracies including the UK, Germany, Canada and Australia.

These countries, which are the most responsible for greenhouse gas emissions, continue to back fossil fuel expansion fueling climate breakdown while cracking down on activists and groups sounding the alarm – a trend condemned by Mary Lawlor, UN special rapporteur on human rights defenders, as “unacceptable”.

“People taking peaceful action to draw attention to global warming, and calling for governments to finally do something about it, are human rights defenders – who the US government states that it supports. [But] that must mean support for all human rights defenders, even where they challenge action by the US state itself or the interests of powerful companies,” said Lawlor.

“Existing legislation is being misused or new legislation is being brought in to criminalise peaceful acts calling for real action to combat climate change. This is unacceptable.”

In Utah, a major oil, coal and gas producer in the Rocky Mountain region, lawmakers passed an anti-protest law carrying up to five years’ jail time after discussing the need to protect fossil gas. “We’re being forced out of coal, which is cheap, reliable and plentiful, but have nowhere to go to find a replacement energy source because natural gas is also under attack,” a lawmaker wrote in an email in January 2023, obtained by the Guardian.

Prosecuting non-violent climate protesters is “just legalised violence”, according to Bill McKibben, an environmentalist and grassroots organiser who has been arrested for participating in peaceful climate protests.

“It’s disgusting, it’s deeply un-American, and in the end it won’t stop the transition to a cleaner world, but it will do great damage to good people and organizations in the next few years.”

A volley of anti-protest laws punishing civil disobedience with felonies, fines and long jail sentences has been passed by states across the US – a response, at least in part, to the 2016 Indigenous-led non-violent uprising against the Dakota Access oil pipeline on the Standing Rock Indian reservation.

Dakota Access pipeline water protectors face off with various law enforcement agencies on 22 February 2017. Photograph: ddp USA/Rex/Shutterstock

Oklahoma, the sixth-largest oil- and gas-producing state in the US, was the first to pass laws designed to hold individuals and “conspiring” organisations criminally and civilly liable for tampering with or trespassing on so-called critical infrastructure such as pipelines. This inspired a nationwide push from the American Legislative Exchange Council (Alec), a rightwing fossil fuel-funded group that brings together corporations and lawmakers behind closed doors to craft model legislation on environmental standards, reproductive rights and voting, among other issues.

According to the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law, 45 states have considered new anti-protest legislation since 2017, with 22 critical infrastructure bills enacted in states including Wisconsin, North Dakota, Missouri, Arkansas, Florida and Louisiana. A critical infrastructure law passed in Georgia in 2023 carries a penalty of up to 20 years in prison for intentional damage to critical infrastructure with the intention of disrupting service. In Louisiana, unauthorized entry around pipelines and other oil and gas facilities is punishable by imprisonment – with or without hard labor for up to five years.

So far, the critical infrastructure laws have led to scores of criminal and civil charges against climate and environmental activists in several states.

This includes three activists and a journalist in Louisiana protesting against the Dakota Access pipeline; 31 activists charged in Texas after rappelling off a bridge to hang banners protesting against oil and gas; and eight protesters in West Virginia criminally charged for peacefully disrupting construction of the Mountain Valley pipeline (MVP), the fossil fuel project forced through by the Democratic lawmaker Joe Manchin with help from the supreme court.

Critics say the wave of critical infrastructure bills is unnecessary as states can use existing laws to prosecute property destruction and violence, and that these laws impinge on the freedom of assembly, petition and speech – which are first amendment rights.

Rico Sisney, who was charged in 2019 under Texas’s critical infrastructure law, said the felony charge violated his constitutional rights, leading him to approach future protest activities with “a great deal of caution”.

“One of the things that makes the critical infrastructure laws so harmful is that they’re essentially taking something that would be a trespassing charge and turning it into a felony,” Sisney said. “It’s essentially a way that the fossil fuel industry is lobbying to make it harder and harder to have free speech or to engage in these kinds of demonstrations.”

Emails obtained through dozens of freedom of information requests by the Guardian found that the groups that first initiated the legislation in 2017 – including Alec, Marathon Petroleum, and American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers – have continued pushing anti-protest laws in different states, including most recently in Idaho in 2023.

The Guardian also found that the energy companies Dominion and Rocky Mountain Power pushed for anti-protest laws across different states.

“The records provide a picture of how lawmakers have been captured, and how Alec, a pay-to-play organisation, works. It’s scary, because this is a direct assault on our first amendment rights … To find novel ways to try to criminalise [protest] is just really disgusting and disturbing and shows that we’re moving towards fascism,” said David Armiak, research director with the Center for Media and Democracy.

In a statement, Alec defended its tactics. “Alec has long supported free speech and peaceful protests. What we don’t support, however, is any criminal activity such as trespassing or damaging critical infrastructure. Any suggestions to the contrary are false,” spokesperson Lars Dalseide said.

Protesters are confronted by security during a demonstration against the Dakota Access pipeline near Cannon Ball, North Dakota, on 3 September 2024. Photograph: Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images

Dalseide claimed the model legislation “does not apply to climate activists”. “What it does apply to is anyone who breaks into a critical infrastructure facility and/or causes damage to the facility, materials, or property. If those actions – which I believe were already against the law before 2017 – are required to take part in a non-violent protest, then perhaps we should re-examine the definition of non-violent,” he said.

The new investigation by the Guardian builds on previous reporting by Documented, the Intercept, HuffPo, the Center for Media and Democracy and the International Center for Non-Profit Law that points to corporate lobbyists and state lawmakers working in cahoots to make organising against fossil fuel projects that are driving the climate emergency increasingly legally risky.

The Guardian was unable to obtain emails from lawmakers in states including Minnesota, Georgia and Texas due to restrictions on access to information.

“We’re living in a climate emergency that’s unfolding, and we need to move away from fossil fuels. [But] the industry is a powerful force – it’s got incredible wealth, and they’re doing all that they can to extend the lifeline on their industry or profit model,” said Armiak, who investigates Alec’s ties with the fossil fuel industry.

Ohio: early adopter of anti-protest laws

In the midst of a fracking boom, which helped propel it to its position as the sixth-largest gas-producing state, Ohio also became one of the first to introduce Alec’s model legislation in 2018.

On 7 December 2017, Alec sent a letter to lawmakers to ask for their support of their Critical Infrastructure Protection Act. The next day, then state senator Frank Hoagland, an Alec member who runs a private security firm that has reportedly consulted for fossil fuel companies, emailed his senate colleagues asking them to co-sponsor the bill he was about to introduce, according to records obtained by the Guardian.

From: Senator Frank Hoagland

To: All Senate Members

Subject: Co-Sponsor Request

Date: Dec. 8, 2017

“Some have attempted to disrupt operations at facilities and/or damage vital infrastructure as part of a ‘protest’ … I will soon be introducing legislation that seeks to discourage such activities by enhancing penalties associated with certain types of wrongful acts.”

Hoagland added that the legislation was not intended to restrict first amendment rights to free speech or the ability to protest peacefully. However, he hoped the bill would pre-emptively prevent direct action.

“It may make groups or individuals think twice though, before they destroy private property or impede critical infrastructure,” Hoagland wrote. He noted that Ohio lacked the scale of protests seen in other states, “but it makes sense to be prepared”.

Fossil fuel lobbyists were eager to support the bill and pushed for fracking infrastructure to be protected, according to the emails.

Rob Eshenbaugh, a lobbyist registered with AFPM, Exxon and Marathon Petroleum, and lobbyists registered with Gulfport Energy met with members of the Ohio legislative service commission, which drafts legislation for lawmakers, to ask for revisions to the bill including adding language about protecting oil and gas wells. (The Guardian contacted Eshenbaugh, AFPM, Exxon, Marathon and Gulfport for comment, but did not hear back.)

According to Dave Anderson, policy and communications manager for the Energy and Policy Institute, a non-profit watchdog tracking misinformation, Ohio has passed multiple laws in recent years “geared towards financially benefiting the fossil fuel industry and protecting its interests”. Lawmakers have supported industry interests despite public hearings dominated by residents concerned about environmental harms.

“What these emails show for the first time is the direct influence of lobbyists for the fossil fuel industry on this critical infrastructure bill in Ohio,” said Anderson.

Hoagland, who retired from the Ohio senate in December 2023, called the allegations “misinformed and misleading”. He said: “Your email appears to be merely a propaganda effort and for what reason? I have personally and professionally not heard one word on this topic.”

Hoagland’s 2018 bill did not pass. But it returned, backed by powerful utilities, and passed in 2021 after lobbying by more than a dozen fossil fuel trade groups and multinational corporations including Exxon and Marathon. The law carries penalties of up to eight years in prison.

The expansion looks set to continue in Ohio, which is experiencing more flooding and less ice on the Great Lakes due to global heating. JD Vance, the Ohio senator and Republican vice-president pick, has called for an expansion of pipelines and drilling wells that would tie Ohio into oil and gas for decades to come. “I believe that right now is the time to double down on the Ohio energy industry,” Vance has said.

West Virginia: a controversial pipeline

One of the biggest priorities in recent years for climate and environmental activists has been the Mountain Valley pipeline (MVP), a 300-mile (480km) fossil gas pipeline stretching across the Appalachian mountains in Virginia and West Virginia. In 2018, as construction crews began clearing dense forestland, protesters occupied trees along the pipeline route. The pipeline is forecast to add nearly 90m metric tons of planet-heating emissions annually, equivalent to 23 coal plants.

Appalachians Against Pipelines, a direct action group, has documented its campaign against the Mountain Valley pipeline, and how anti-protest laws have targeted its members. Photograph: @appalachiansagainstpipelines

Fossil fuel lobbyists and lawmakers already had a close working relationship, according to emails obtained by the Guardian, and it didn’t take long for the gas industry to respond to protests by suggesting a critical infrastructure bill.

In June 2019, Dominion lobbyist Robert Orndorff emailed Robert Akers, chief counsel to the West Virginia legislature’s joint energy and manufacturing committee, to explain that Amy Summers, a house delegate, had reached out to ask if they had “ever considered a bill to address civil disobedience towards pipelines”, according to an email first published by the Intercept. (Dominion did not respond to the Guardian’s request for comment. The company told the Intercept it did not initiate the bill.)

“I know two years ago we did pass a bill that created a criminal offence for trespass. I am not sure it addressed civil disobedience. Maybe the Energy committee should consider such a law,” added Orndorff, copying other lobbyists into the email including Greg Hoyer, who lobbied for EQT Corporation, the majority shareholder and operator of the MVP.

In November 2019, Hoyer had dinner with the chairman of the state energy committee and Akers, the committee’s chief counsel. After dinner, he forwarded Akers an op-ed from EQT’s president and CEO, Toby Rice, saying “the industry needs to spread good news, and gas, abroad”, according to an email obtained by the Guardian.

From: Greg Hoyer, EQT

To: Robert Akers, Chief Counsel to the Committee on Energy

Subject: FW: EQT’s Toby Rice says the industry needs to spread good news, and gas, abroad

Date: Nov. 14, 2019

“A couple of good reads for the Chairman. We had dinner the other night and I told him I would pass these articles along.”

Then, at the start of the legislative session, Orion Strategies lobbyist Thomas J O’Neil emailed Akers.

From: Thomas J O’Neill, Orion Strategies

To: Robert Akers, Chief Counsel to the Committee on Energy

Subject: West Virginia Critical Infrastructure Protection Act – Revised Draft TJO 14Jan2020.docx

Date: Jan. 21, 2020

“Draft bill attached”

The attachment was called “West Virginia Critical Infrastructure Protection Act – Revised Draft TJO 14Jan2020”, according to an email obtained by the Guardian.

O’Neill was a registered lobbyist for two powerful trade groups: American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) and the Oil & Natural Gas Association of West Virginia. (Neither trade group nor Akers responded to requests for comment.)

Just 10 days after that email, on 30 January 2020, lawmaker John Kelly introduced the critical infrastructure protection bill, which he later admitted was at the behest of the fossil fuel industry.

“Simple explanation, this bill reinforces property rights. When a person goes on private property and does intentional damage,” Kelly wrote to a constituent who questioned the legislation, in an email in February 2020 first reported by the Intercept. “The bill was requested by the natural gas industry, because protesters entered a drilling site and destroyed equipment.”

The law, which carried penalties of one to five years in prison, passed in spring 2020.

In an email, Chris Hall of Orion Strategies took credit for organising support for the law that he said was “intended to preempt acts of intentional trespass and damage to critical infrastructure facilities”.

Demonstrators protest the Mountain Valley pipeline in Alexandria, Virginia, on 28 September 2021. Photograph: Cliff Owen/AP

“Orion Strategies would like to thank all those involved in supporting the passage of this new law that will help ensure development of some of this region’s most important infrastructure projects,” Hall wrote.

In an email response to the Guardian, Hall, Orion’s chief financial and administrative officer, said: “Orion Strategies firmly stands by its work on this essential bipartisan legislation which increased penalties on already-illegal activities by terrorists and criminals who were destroying equipment and endangering the lives and health of workers on private property job sites. This law protects all critical infrastructure – including renewable energy, water and sewer – not just natural gas facilities.”

In 2024, lawmakers amended the law to broaden offences and punish some second-offence felonies with up to 10 years in prison.

“The completion of MVP is the beginning of opportunity creation, for our communities, for America, for our allies and for the planet,” said Rice, EQT’s president, in June, at a joint press conference with Joe Manchin to celebrate gas flowing through the pipeline.

Utah: ‘corporate capture’ of government

In December 2022, after shooting attacks on electrical substations in several states by unidentified perpetrators with unknown motives, Alec promoted its model critical infrastructure protection bill as a solution. There is no evidence the attacks were linked to anyone in the climate movement.

Shortly after, lawmakers went to work pushing such laws in states including Idaho and Utah that could have major consequences for climate activists.

Utah is highly dependent on coal and gas. Fossil fuels accounted for about 80% of Utah’s total electricity generation in 2023, according to the US Energy Information Administration. In February 2023, three months after Alec’s suggestion, Utah introduced a critical infrastructure law that punished peaceful protests against fossil fuel infrastructure with up to five years in jail.

Lawmaker Carl Albrecht, an Alec member who has long worked to protect the state’s fossil fuel industry, publicly claimed the law was in response to attacks on substations in other states. But emails obtained by the Guardian show that Republican lawmakers were brainstorming ways to protect gas, which they believed was “under attack”.

At the time, Albrecht was working closely with another Republican lawmaker, Colin Jack, an “Alec policy champion”, to protect coal and gas in Utah. The emails show that Jack and Albrecht asked several Utah power companies if they should pass a law defining gas as “renewable” so it would “be under less attack”.

In 2023, days after Ohio’s governor signed a law defining gas as “green energy”, Jack wrote to lobbyists for several power and utility companies, and Albrecht, about the possibility of passing similar legislation.

From: State Rep. Colin Jack

To: State Rep. Carl Albrecht and Utah power companies

Subject: Re: “Green” Natural Gas

Date: Jan. 13, 2023

“Carl [Albrecht] and I were wondering if there’s anything here that would help us in the power production world?

“We’re being forced out of coal, which is cheap, reliable, and plentiful, but have nowhere to go to find a replacement energy source because natural gas is also under attack. I wonder if there’s any value to us as an industry to add natural gas to the code as ‘renewable’ or something, so that it will be under less attack.”

In the end, Albrecht introduced the critical infrastructure bill, and emails show he made several amendments to the draft legislation per industry requests. In one example, an attorney from a major Utah power cooperative drafted language in the bill – specifically the definition of “critical infrastructure facility”, which included oil and gas facilities.

Dominion, which had pushed for West Virginia’s critical infrastructure law, also sought amendments to Utah’s critical infrastructure law – requesting language that would protect gas and electricity. The Utah Petroleum Association also requested changes to protect fossil fuel infrastructure. Albrecht replied: “Yes, that’s fine. I’ll send to the drafter thx.”

The Guardian reached out to Albrecht, Jack, Dominion and the Utah Petroleum Association for comment, but did not hear back.

In response to the new records obtained by the Guardian, Ruhan Nagra, director of the Environmental Justice Clinic at the University of Utah College of Law, condemned “the extent of the corporate capture and the way that industry and Alec have commandeered the machinery of the government to achieve their ends”.

“It should really be shocking to people that industry is sitting there and emailing elected representatives and drafting legislation, and lawmakers are treating industry as co-drafters of legislation – that should be deeply, deeply alarming to people,” Nagra said.

Utah is a deeply red state, and the Republican party currently holds the entire congressional delegation, all statewide executive offices and supermajorities in both state legislative chambers. Protests and acts of civil disobedience are among the only ways people concerned about the climate can push for change.

“In states like Utah, we cannot afford to have this type of legislation … It’s chilling speech,” Nagra said.

“These critical infrastructure laws are so dangerous because they threaten to quash the only thing that can get us out of this crisis, which is a mobilised, grassroots, global community rising up and demanding change,” she added.

Idaho: another bill backed by fossil fuel firms

Also in February 2023, the Idaho lawmaker Britt Raybould introduced a critical infrastructure bill in the state, which was backed by fossil fuel firms.

Supporters included Marathon Petroleum, one of the companies that in 2017 signed a letter by Alec to state lawmakers asking them to pass laws that would hold individuals and organisations criminally and financially liable for damage to any so-called critical infrastructure.

Another backer of the Idaho bill was Rocky Mountain Power, which has an energy mix that includes gas. Records obtained by the Guardian show that the company was also involved in the Utah bill.

Police officers detain a demonstrator during a protest against the Line 3 pipeline in Park Rapids, Minnesota, on 7 June 2021. Photograph: Nicholas Pfosi/Reuters

In one committee hearing, Raybould repeated arguments made by Alec after the substation attacks. At another, she shared a map with the committee that showed other states with critical infrastructure laws. “Idaho would not be the first state to go down this path,” she said. “… This is not Idaho breaking new territory, this is simply providing protection within our state.”

A committee member pointed out that there was already a trespass law on the books in the state. Raybould replied that her bill mirrored the trespass language but added an “enhanced penalty”. Another committee member asked if the bill was model legislation. Raybould answered: “No, however there are other states who have pursued similar legislation.”

Records obtained by the Guardian show that Raybould emailed various groups asking them to testify in support of her bill, including a lobbyist registered for Rocky Mountain Power (RMP). Several companies including RMP replied to say they supported the bill. Raybould told the committee that Marathon Petroleum and RMP supported the legislation.

Raybould introduced critical infrastructure bills in 2023 and 2024, but they failed to pass.

The Guardian received no response from Raybould, Marathon or Rocky Mountain Power.

“You now have evidence that the whole Alec strategy to address the power plant attacks with the Critical Infrastructure Protection Act was just spin and a new PR method to get the bill passed in places where it hadn’t passed,” said Armiak from the Center for Media and Democracy.

“We all have a first amendment right to express ourselves,” Armiak said. “That right should be respected. And if people aren’t expressing themselves without a fear of arrest, then that is something that we should all be concerned about.”

Hilary Beaumont is an investigative journalist who covers the intersection of climate change, Indigenous rights and immigration. Follow her on Twitter @hilarybeaumont

Nina Lakhani is senior reporter for Guardian US. Twitter @ninalakhani