Eco-Activist’s Sordid Criminal History Sheds Light On Parents’ Role In Children’s Climate Crusade

Role In Children’s Climate Crusade

Chris White | Energy Reporter

One of the parents of a child suing the government over climate change is a radical activist who’s been arrested several times attempting to delay multi-billion dollar energy projects.

  • Media reports discussing a nearly three-year-old children’s climate lawsuit have largely shied away from highlighting the role the kids’ parents play in the litigation.
  • A parent of one of the young people suing the federal government has a history opposing and seeking to derail major projects likes the Dakota Access Pipeline, among others.

A parent of one of the children suing the U.S. government for not doing enough to confront climate change has a long criminal record connected to her attempts to derail energy projects.

Her legal history has flown under the radar as the litigation gains more media traction.

Jayden Foytlin is among 21 young people suing the U.S. federal government for not doing more to address global warming. Media reports discussing Jayden’s story have not fleshed out the role her mother, Cherri Foytlin, played in a growing anti-pipeline movement. Cherri has been arrested at least three times during direct action protests, according to copies of her arrest records obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Cherri has become a major actor in the environmental movement, opposing a number of pipeline projects over the past eight years, including the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). She is focused on scuttling the Bayou Bridge Pipeline in southern Louisiana, even as the project nears completion. Many of Cherri’s protests and arrests have been caught on video and used to promote her demonstrations.

Activist Cherri Foytlin talks at a Fossil Free Fast rally in 2018 (Screencap at

She can be seen in online videos resisting arrest, arguing with government authorities and refusing to leave a local sheriff’s office after claiming Louisiana officials were “bought by big oil.” Cherri’s group L’eau Est La Vie, or Water is Life, for instance, claimed on Facebook to have successfully shut down an October 2018 Energy Transfer Partners’ shareholders meeting in Texas using various direct action techniques.

Cherri has an arrest warrant out in her name for disrupting that ETP meeting, Reyna Raul, a public information officer in Dallas County, told TheDCNF. She was initially charged in October 2018 for disorderly conduct, Raul confirmed, but a judge reviewed Cherri’s case and determined in February that her attempts to derail the meeting, which was chaired by ETP CEO Kelcy Warren, was a misdemeanor.


ETP is responsible for developing the multi-billion DAPL, a project stretching from North Dakota to Illinois that began in 2014 before former President Barack Obama signed an executive order in 2016 holding up the pipeline. He said the project would contribute to climate change. President Donald Trump issued an order of his own in 2017 allowing construction on the 1,172-mile-long line to continue.

Cherri’s story is unusual, in that the Louisiana native was originally a supporter of the energy industry. (RELATED: Trump Releases Final Keystone XL Report And Enviros Are Not Happy About It)

She advocated for the end of Obama’s moratorium on off-shore oil drilling following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Cherri told U.S. senators during a rally in 2010 the drilling moratorium would mean her family could lose their home — Cherri’s husband at the time worked on an oil rig.

Cherri’s daughter began targeting oil companies fewer than five years after her mom’s foray into political activism.

“60 Minutes” interviewed Jayden Foytlin, 15, on March 3 about the lawsuit she and others are bringing against the federal government in regard to limiting fossil fuel extraction on federal lands. Jayden told CBS’s Steve Kroft floods near her Louisiana home convinced her of the need to file the lawsuit.

Her case — Juliana v. United States — was filed in 2015 and survived several unsuccessful attempts by the Trump administration to stifle the lawsuit.

Children are seen during climate march prior to the opening session of the COP23 UN Climate Change Conference 2017, hosted by Fiji but held in Bonn, in World Conference Center Bonn, Germany, November 6, 2017. REUTERS/Wolfgang Rattay

Jayden’s fellow plaintiffs, all of whom are between the ages of 11 and 22, asked a Oregon court in February to issue an injunction to prevent the government from issuing oil extraction licenses before March, when the Trump administration planned to offer nearly 80 million acres of unleased areas off the Gulf of Mexico.

Juliana v. U.S. stirred up a lot of controversy during the past three years, especially among people who support the energy industry and its workers.

People like Cherri are using their children as shields, Steve Milloy, an attorney and adjunct scholar at Competitive Enterprise Institute, told TheDCNF. His position effectively mirrors similar sentiments from conservatives who believe environmentalists are getting desperate to stop the production of fossil fuels.

“Foytlin is a case in point of an activist using her child as a human shield behind which she advances her intellectually and morally bankrupt political agenda,” said Milloy, a climate skeptic who holds shares in ExxonMobil. “Their science and economics is so bad that they gotta use kids.”

He’s argued in the past that Juliana v. U.S. is a ploy to use children as weapons against the fossil fuel industry.

Julia Olson, an environmental attorney based in Oregon who runs the nonprofit Our Children’s Trust, kickstarted the lawsuit and soon brought Jayden and others aboard her crusade, including former NASA scientist James Hansen, who joined the campaign on behalf of his granddaughter, Sophie Kivlehan.

Olson appeared on the March 3 “60 Minutes” interview and dismissed the idea that she and other adults are using Jayden and others as pawns.

“They get quite offended on that comment and at that question — they are very much using me,” she told CBS’s Steve Kroft in response to a question about whether she’s using the kids.

Their case has been held up for months. The U.S. Supreme Court in November 2018 decided not to block the lawsuit after Chief Justice John Roberts granted the government a stay in October 2018. The court’s order said the government should seek relief before the 9th Circuit.

Cherri’s group has not yet responded to TheDCNF’s request for comment about the nature of her evolution to anti-oil activist or whether her criminal record could affect her daughter’s lawsuit.

Follow Chris White on Facebook and Twitter

From The Daily Caller

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John Bell
March 18, 2019 10:07 am

But you can bet she flies and drives a lot (to save the world) and heats her home and uses electricity, and phones, and on and on. this is the worst kind of hypocrite, the ends justify the means in her mind.

Reply to  John Bell
March 18, 2019 10:49 am

… the ends justify the means in her mind.

That is the simple recipe of tyrants everywhere and back to the dawn of history. It is morally bankrupt. People who espouse it are dangerous to freedom and democracy.

Reply to  commieBob
March 18, 2019 12:39 pm

People who espouse it are dangerous to freedom and democracy.

The Latin phrase “EXITUS ACTA PROBAT” appears on George Washington’s family coat of arms. The phrase dates back to Ovid and means: the result justifies the deed. In other words, the ends justify the means. Yup, ol’ George was a danger to freedom and democracy.


Reply to  Jim Masterson
March 18, 2019 1:10 pm

Danger is a potential. I have never been bitten by a rattlesnake but that doesn’t mean they aren’t dangerous.

The other side of the coin is that things that are harmless are also mostly useless.

Reply to  commieBob
March 18, 2019 3:41 pm



michael hart
Reply to  commieBob
March 18, 2019 4:41 pm

Seriously, yes, Jim.

Cherri Foytlin and daughter are clearly both harmless and useless. The real problem is people in authority who don’t throw them out on their ear after their second complaint. Offhand, I can’t recall the technical legal word that is normally used to describe such “legal” time-wasting attacks. Is it “vexatious”?

Reply to  commieBob
March 18, 2019 5:03 pm

Seriously, yes, Jim.

So you’re okay with calling George Washington a rattlesnake or useless? He was dangerous to tyranny.


James Clarke
Reply to  commieBob
March 18, 2019 7:20 pm

Did George Washington believe that the ends justify the means? The idea that he must have held that belief because it was a phrase on a centuries old family coat of arms, is quite irrational. As was your equating him to a rattlesnake because they are both dangerous.

Your logic, Jim Masterson, reminded me of Woody Allen in the movie ‘Love and Death’, only I don’t think you are trying to be funny.

Reply to  commieBob
March 19, 2019 6:05 am

James Clarke
March 18, 2019 at 7:20 pm

As was your equating him to a rattlesnake because they are both dangerous.

Your logic, Jim Masterson, reminded me of Woody Allen . . . .

They weren’t my words. Reread the thread. Our friend “commieBob” came up with those words. I guess pointing out the fact makes me guilty. George Washington is one of my heroes. Good grief!


Reply to  commieBob
March 19, 2019 10:20 am

George was ignorant, dangerous, & lucky when he was younger.

Jumoville was his fault … he was in charge & wasn’t paying attention.

He was lucky, and just as incompetent as Braddock.

But based on his actions, it appears that “ends justifies means” was core. Sometimes captured deserters need to be lined up and shot as example, to maintain authority, sometimes they don’t.

He did learn from his mistakes.

History is re-written for the winners.

Reply to  Jim Masterson
March 18, 2019 7:43 pm

The Latin probat does NOT always mean justify, it can mean test, as in “The exception proves the rule,” where proves obviously has the latter meaning, tests.

The English word end is ambiguous, meaning either objective or result.

Exitus, however, means outcome, not end in the sense of “objective.” What we should consider is not the objective, but the outcome. In Washington’s case, the outcome was Freedom for the Colonists. The deed was rebellion. I’ll leave it to you whether it was “justified” or “tested.” Hitler’s outcomes could never justify his deeds in a thousand years.

Reply to  jorgekafkazar
March 19, 2019 5:55 am

Exitus literally means: a going out or a going forth. Other meanings include: a means of going out, exit; end, finish; and issue, result. It’s a fourth declension, masculine noun.

Acta is a participle of the verb ago, which means to set into motion or to drive. Some of the other meanings include to act, to attend to the matter of, to be concerned. Here it’s used as a Latin substantive, or it’s an adjective being used as a noun as in “the meek shall inherit the Earth.” The word “meek” is an adjective.

Probo is a first conjugation verb which means to make or find good. We get probate from it which means: one who approves as in a will. Other meanings include: to approve, pronounce good; to judge by a certain standard; to recommend as good; and to show, prove, demonstrate.

So you are right, the meaning has changed over the years.


Reply to  John Bell
March 18, 2019 12:15 pm

Using the kiddies is nothing new. Look up the Children’s Crusade. This is just history repeating itself. It is disgusting.

Reply to  Ex-PH2
March 18, 2019 6:17 pm

Remember “Save the children”..?

Yeah.. Maybe we did ourselves a disservice..

Joel Snider
Reply to  John Bell
March 18, 2019 12:18 pm

Based on the size of her, my guess is her carbon-footprint just going up the stairs doubles that of my fossil-fuel burning car.

Louis Hooffstetter
Reply to  Joel Snider
March 18, 2019 6:00 pm

Are you saying she generates more methane than a herd of dairy cows?

Joel Snider
Reply to  Louis Hooffstetter
March 19, 2019 11:32 am

Certainly a C02 doubling effect by the time she reaches the top stair.

March 18, 2019 10:43 am

She reminds me of the kind of “parent” that convinces their 5yo son that he should “identify” and “transition” into a girl. People who don’t recognize the “science” of CAGW as rubbish … certainly don’t understand the biological science of XY chromosomes and sex organs. Science is the only VICTIM with these kind of cretins forcing their “beliefs” into it.

March 18, 2019 10:44 am

Scumbags will be scumbags. The environmental movement as all here know has a long history of subverting the legal process which is poorly understood by the public.

That extremists use children as human shields is expected.

March 18, 2019 10:52 am

Munchausen by Proxy.

Louis Hooffstetter
Reply to  buggs
March 18, 2019 6:01 pm

Buggs nails it!

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  buggs
March 18, 2019 7:40 pm

It reminds me of the child beauty contests where the ambitious moms are pushing and shoving their precious little ones onto the stage and getting revenge for previous losses, especially their own.

Canada has hockey parents as their proxy.

March 18, 2019 11:03 am

Meanwhile the American legal system loves it. Loads of dosh and never a decision. Just shunt it around and feed on the carcass. Anyone of right mind knows it’s a dead duck.

Tom Gelsthorpe
March 18, 2019 11:11 am

Exploiting children for doomsday photo ops is child abuse. Shame on these “activists.”

Don’t forget that Ira Einhorn, one of the founders of the first Earth Day nearly fifty years ago, murdered his girlfriend and stuffed her body into a trunk in his Philadelphia apartment. Months later when fluids from the decomposing corpse began to seep into the apartment below, Einhorn finally got caught. He then went on the lam and lived 23 years in Europe before being caught again, extradited, tried and convicted.

Not everyone trying to roll the world back to an eco-paradise that never existed, is squeaky clean. Maybe it’s not a total coincidence that Einhorn’s last name means “Unicorn” in English.

Carbon Bigfoot
March 18, 2019 11:26 am


John Endicott
Reply to  Carbon Bigfoot
March 18, 2019 12:05 pm

I’m not experiencing any problems with the website and IE. Perhaps you need to upgrade to a newer version of IE. Or else try one of the many alternative browsers (Firefox, Chrome, Opera, or even Microsoft’s Edge to name just a few of the better known ones).

Reply to  Carbon Bigfoot
March 18, 2019 12:51 pm

I was able to pull up the web site up OK on Internet Explorer 11.

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  RicDre
March 18, 2019 7:41 pm

Many times upon opening the page, it stops and has to reload.. It is ads on the page causing it.

Peta of Newark
March 18, 2019 11:36 am

I’m with Buggs and Alasdair..
Here’s a puzzlement – what was the (average) Body Mass Index of your Salem Witches?

Shit food begets what – Happy smiling people?

Yes it does actually – for the first hour after they’ve eaten it – then its all downhill from there.
She should be in hospital – not jail.

The parents of Greta should be in jail though.
What they’ve done is calculated and pre-meditated.

And just because her father is named after Svante Arsenious – a bloated old phart (here’s the sh1t diet angle again) who imagined he understood Stefan’s Law better than Stefan himself.

Not dissimilar to all contemporary climate scientists in fact – the Sh1t Diet is proving very popular.
not looking good is it – how do we crack this nut?

Reply to  Peta of Newark
March 18, 2019 1:27 pm

Peta: “[…] what was the (average) Body Mass Index of your Salem Witches?”

I can’t tell you precisely, but you can rest assured that it was more than a fully laden swallow.

Phil R
Reply to  H.R.
March 18, 2019 4:52 pm

What do you mean? African or European swallow?

Louis Hooffstetter
Reply to  Phil R
March 18, 2019 6:03 pm


John Endicott
Reply to  Phil R
March 19, 2019 5:55 am

What do you mean? African or European swallow?

Bridgekeeper: Huh. I…I don’t know that. [he is thrown over by his own spell] AUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGGGGHHH!!!

Michael 2
Reply to  H.R.
March 23, 2019 10:09 am

Swallow: Noun or verb?

Joel Snider
March 18, 2019 12:17 pm

‘Olson appeared on the March 3 “60 Minutes” interview and dismissed the idea that she and other adults are using Jayden and others as pawns. “They get quite offended on that comment and at that question — they are very much using me,”’

Translation: ‘ABSOLUTELY we are using children as pawns – without a lick of shame about it, either.’

Greg Cavanagh
Reply to  Joel Snider
March 18, 2019 4:56 pm

That she gets upset with the accusation means she knows it and feels shame. The anger is in rebellion to the shame she feels. She attacks as a defense mechanism. She therefor is as guilty as sin and she knows it.

March 18, 2019 12:20 pm

“Fossil Free Fast” rally ? Doesn’t look like Cherri does much fasting….

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  sonofametman
March 18, 2019 12:39 pm

I was puzzled by their meaning, but I guess they were going for the triple-aliteration, and by “fast” they mean right away, or now. “Now” is a better word grammatically, but they had to have that triple-aliteration. Dumb.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
March 18, 2019 1:22 pm

“Fossil Free Forthwith” would have eliminated the ambiguity, eh?

March 18, 2019 12:41 pm

Her blue dress in the photo looks to be made from rayon or nylon, both petroleum products.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  DHR
March 18, 2019 1:36 pm

I hear the Devil wears a blue dress. And also Prada. Just what I heard.

Mark Pawelek
Reply to  DHR
March 18, 2019 3:33 pm

Rayon is not an oil product. It’s made from treated cellulose. Often from regenerated cotton.

John Endicott
Reply to  Mark Pawelek
March 19, 2019 6:04 am

Rayon is not an oil product.

True but it’s heavily processed with chemicals that pollute the air and water, so not exactly an eco-friendly material. Environmentalists are supposed to care about actual pollution as well as the non-pollutant known as CO2.

Derek Colman
Reply to  DHR
March 18, 2019 5:32 pm

Sorry, your argument falls down. Rayon is a cellulosic fibre and is made by extracting cellulose from wood pulp. Nylon however is made from extracts from coal and oil, so you are half right.

March 18, 2019 12:49 pm

Billy McKibben used other people’s kids on the taxpayers dime for his 350. .Org campaign. They are all scum who have to be called out for every “action”.

lee Riffee
March 18, 2019 1:27 pm

It’s too bad that some court could not force these people (meaning these children and their parents/guardians) to cease and desist from using said fossil fuels and anything made with or from them. That sort of reminds me of some lawsuits a few years ago against tobacco companies by older people who were still smoking when they sued (or continued to smoke long after warning labels were placed on tobacco products). Well, the suits got thrown out and one of the reasons for that was that if the plaintiffs knew and believed that tobacco was harmful then why did they continue using it for so long? Continuing to use a product while suing for alleged damages caused by said product generally does not look good at all in court.
It is too bad that we have such a spineless press where hypocrites like this are seldom asked such questions as to why they keep right on using fossil fuels and/or things made with or derived from them.

Chris Hanley
March 18, 2019 1:36 pm

In answer to any pedants out there a shield can also be a weapon:
comment image

Greg Cavanagh
Reply to  Chris Hanley
March 18, 2019 4:59 pm

That would get heavy quick.

Pop Piasa
March 18, 2019 1:42 pm

Speaking of lawsuits, is there any way of organizing a class-action suit against the principal members of the climate scare by people who have been screwed by the knee-jerk policies resulting from their exaggeration and dishonest research practices?

William Baikie
March 18, 2019 2:44 pm

Chris White seemed like a un-bias reporter until he included this “…said Milloy, a climate skeptic who holds shares in ExxonMobil”. Really? Why include that data? Obviously Chris couldn’t contain his real bias.

March 18, 2019 3:31 pm

There is more to this story.
Plaintiff #1: Kelsey Cascadia Rose Juliana, Oregon
Her activist parents stopped government from managing the forests. Now she blames wildfires on “climate change.”

Plaintiff #2: Levi Draheim, Florida
He lives on a barrier island off the hurricane-prone Atlantic coast. The government is supposed to protect him from storms and rising sea level that have always eroded coastal islands.

Plaintiff #3: Jayden Foytlin, Louisiana
Her home was flooded in Rayne, LA, about 20 miles from the Gulf Coast and a mere 20 feet above sea level. She claims a right against rainstorms, even though her home is called the “Frog Capital of the World,” with numerous houses elevated on blocks.

Greg Cavanagh
Reply to  Ron Clutz
March 18, 2019 5:03 pm

Is that like jumping in front of a car to claim insurance damages?
Are there laws on the books anywhere to disannul these grievance charges?

John Endicott
Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
March 19, 2019 6:07 am

Is that like jumping in front of a car to claim insurance damages?

Ah, “Whiplash” Hwang (M*A*S*H* reference).

March 18, 2019 3:58 pm

These people need to understand that life doesn’t continue without fossil fuels. Society will break down and hungry zombies will eat their kids.

Ronald Bruce
March 18, 2019 5:49 pm

Disconnect her electricity and gas, ban her from using Petroleum products no phones no transport no food supplies no water no sewerage make her live the life that she wants us to live.

Bruce Clark
March 18, 2019 7:49 pm

Not sure of the legal situation in the US but here in Australia, if I bring a civil action against another party, I may be liable for their legal costs if I lose. If I win I can claim legal costs from the other party. This tends to put a bit of a damper on things by stopping speculative cases. We do have the ability to declare someone a vexatious litigant. Not sure how that works as I am not a lawyer but I have seen reports of this happening. Most often it us used against convicted criminals suing the state for infringing their rights while in prison.

Reply to  Bruce Clark
March 18, 2019 10:06 pm

The default U.S. rule is that each side pays their own attorney fees, unless a statute allows the prevailing party to recover fees in a specific type of case. For example, as part of the patent laws, a prevailing patent holder can recover attorney fees, but only if the infringement was “willful.”

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights