Creating a Self-Sustaining Media Narrative to Advance Litigation

Our Client

A global mining company focused on earth minerals.

The Issue

Our client sought government permission to extract American natural resources crucial to the electrification of our domestic economy. After years of due diligence and outreach from the client to a large and diverse set of stakeholders, one organization remained vocally opposed to the project, arguing that use of the land for resource extraction violated the group’s cultural and religious beliefs.

The Challenge

There was considerable ideological overlap between those who support increasing domestic natural resources extraction and those who prioritize religious freedom in public policymaking. Our allies were in conflict with themselves. We had to help the client message the benefits of the project while navigating this complex dynamic. We also had to keep an eye on the legal challenge working its way through the US Court of Appeals and potentially the US Supreme Court, which holds diverse and often competing views on religious liberty.

The Opportunity

To expound on the link between domestic resource extraction with national technological and economic security, we knew we needed to highlight the importance of American-made materials for electric vehicles and semiconductors to garner broad support.

The Plan

We had to establish a baseline narrative that American progress in terms of electric vehicles and semiconductor manufacturing relies on a more robust supply of natural resources. We recruited subject matter experts on domestic supply chains, energy policy, foreign policy, and other spheres of influence, making the case that without hardening our supply chain and increasing extraction, key societal goals would be impossible to meet.

We then worked to expand our narrative into concepts of religious liberty and land use. Through First Amendment scholars and legal theorists, we conceded that religious freedom is crucial and protected by our Constitution, but that some claims, such as those made by our adversaries, lack merit. These arguments materialized into numerous amicus briefs, after conducting extensive research and recruiting and educating experts to weigh in.

The Result

As a result, we framed the religious freedom argument within public policy and land use contexts, creating a balanced discussion. This allowed us to educate the public and policymakers, establishing a compelling narrative for both public opinion and legal proceedings. By creating our own legal echo-chamber through the press, legal filings, and among legal scholarship groups, we were able to counter our opponents’ false narrative. The appellate court ultimately sided with our client and rejected our opponents’ appeal.