© 2025

For assistance accessing the Online Public File for KAXE or KBXE, please contact: Steve Neu, IT Engineer, at 800-662-5799.
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations

MN appeals court reverses Aitkin County convictions of Line 3 protester

Protest signs sit outside the Aitkin County Courthouse during the trial of Mylene Vialard, a protester of Enbridge Line 3, on Aug. 30, 2023, in Aitkin.
Contributed
/
Lorie Shaull
Protest signs sit outside the Aitkin County Courthouse during the trial of a protester of Enbridge Line 3 in 2023 in Aitkin.

The appellant successfully argued the state failed to provide sufficient evidence. The state did not file a brief or otherwise participate in the appeal to defend its position.

AITKIN — The Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed trespass on a pipeline and unlawful assembly convictions of a Minneapolis woman who participated in a prayer ceremony at a Line 3 construction site in Aitkin County.

In a nonprecedential opinion filed Monday, March 10, the appeals court ruled the state failed to provide sufficient evidence of any of the three crimes it accused 59-year-old Marian Shaw Moore of committing in 2021.

A jury found Moore guilty of the gross misdemeanor trespass crime and two other misdemeanors: unlawful assembly and presence at an unlawful assembly.

Moore was one of more than 100 people who gathered in January of that year along the construction route of Enbridge’s Line 3 next to Highway 169. The gathering included chanting, singing, jingle dancing and drumming, all of which are part of Anishinaabe healing ceremonies and were intended as prayer for the well-being of the water.

Moore was not arrested that day and officers who testified agreed the gathering was a "peaceful protest," according to the opinion.

In her appeal, Moore argued the state law that the Aitkin County Attorney’s Office used to charge her did not apply, because a pipeline did not yet exist at the site. She also argued the state failed to prove she intended to disturb or threaten the peace, which is required to support a conviction for unlawful assembly.

The state did not file a brief or otherwise participate in the appeal to defend its actions.

The appeals court agreed with Moore’s arguments, finding the use of present tense in the statute language meant a pipeline must be present and operational in order for a trespass violation to occur.

"The state's evidence included photos, videos, and testimony that depict construction workers installing parts of a pipeline into the ground on the day of the gathering," the opinion stated. "it is clear from this evidence that no oil was flowing through the pipeline because it was not operational, and no evidence or testimony suggested otherwise."

Video evidence from a body-worn camera also shows Moore walking away from the construction site after officers gave a dispersal order. The appeals court opinion raised doubt as to whether the gathering constituted an unlawful assembly as a whole.

"The gathering occurred in a remote area, it did not involve anyone making loud noises or causing damage, and its only effects were causing some traffic congestion and some work delay, which testimony explained was not caused by any actions of the people gathered but by a company policy," the opinion stated.

"The conduct exhibited at this gathering, particularly by Moore, did not involve any violence ... and while it may have been 'annoying to others' ... it did not create disruptions."

At least one other Aitkin County conviction of a Line 3 protester is also currently under review by the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Mylene Vialard was found guilty by a jury in 2023 of felony obstruction of justice after she participated in a protest at an Enbridge pumping station in Swatara. Vialard was one of two people who attached themselves to a self-supporting bamboo structure in the driveway.

Vialard’s defense lawyers had asked the judge to consider sentencing her to a misdemeanor given her lack of criminal record and the outcomes of similar Line 3 protester cases. Senior Judge Douglas P. Anderson said there were grounds for the downward departure, but he did not lower the level of charge.