Supreme Court Keeps Line 5 Pipeline Case in Michigan State Court
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Enbridge missed its deadline to move Attorney General Dana Nessel’s pipeline shutdown case to federal court.
DETROIT, MICHIGAN — The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a unanimous victory to Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel on Wednesday, ruling that her case seeking to shut down Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline will remain in state court rather than federal court.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored the 14-page opinion, which determined that the Canadian energy company Enbridge had missed its 30-day deadline to transfer the case to federal court. The company filed its removal request 887 days after receiving Nessel’s initial complaint.
“Today’s decision honors the truth that the Straits of Mackinac are not a bargaining chip and reaffirms what Tribal Nations have always known — we have the right and the responsibility to protect the Great Lakes,” said Bay Mills Indian Community President Whitney Gravelle in a statement.
Pipeline Spans Multiple States
The Line 5 pipeline stretches 645 miles from northwestern Wisconsin to Sarnia, Ontario, passing through Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. A four-mile segment of dual pipelines runs through the Straits of Mackinac, where Lake Huron and Lake Michigan meet.
The pipeline transports up to 23 million gallons of crude oil and natural gas liquids through the straits daily. Nessel has previously characterized the pipeline as a “ticking time bomb” for the Great Lakes.
Long-Running Environmental Concerns
The pipeline has generated sustained opposition from tribal nations and environmental groups in the region. The Supreme Court’s decision resolves a years-long jurisdictional dispute that had delayed proceedings in Nessel’s case.
“The Supreme Court saw through Enbridge’s delay tactics and upheld the rule of law. This is a victory for our waters, our treaty rights, and the next seven generations who depend on the Great Lakes for life itself,” Gravelle added.
Enbridge spokesperson Ryan Duffy responded in an emailed statement, noting that Nessel’s case remains stayed pending the outcome of an appeal in a separate court case. The company’s full response was not included in available court documents.
State Jurisdiction Preserved
The unanimous Supreme Court ruling ensures that Michigan state courts will maintain jurisdiction over the attorney general’s efforts to close the controversial pipeline. The decision marks a significant procedural victory for state officials who have sought to address environmental concerns about the aging infrastructure.
The ruling comes as various legal challenges continue to work their way through different court systems. Michigan officials have consistently argued that state courts are the appropriate venue for addressing issues related to the pipeline’s operation within state boundaries.
