LANSING, Mich. (Michigan News Source) – Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer and her Attorney General Dana Nessel took another swing at shutting down Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline – and missed.
The Line 5 pipeline is a decades-old Enbridge line that carries crude oil and natural gas liquids from western Canada through Wisconsin and Michigan, including a controversial stretch beneath the Straits of Mackinac. In that section, Line 5 consists of two 20-inch parallel pipelines (often called the “dual” or “twin” pipelines) that run along the lakebed. Line 5 transports as much as 23 million gallons of crude oil and natural gas liquids each day. Along the way, it supplies 10 refineries and propane production facilities across both the United States and Canada.
MORE NEWS: Civil Air Patrol to Stage High-Intensity Search and Rescue Exercise in Hillsdale County
In response to safety concerns, Enbridge has proposed building a tunnel deep below the lakebed to house a replacement segment of the pipeline, arguing it would significantly reduce the risk of a spill.
Shutdown push vs. energy reality.
Democratic leaders in Michigan, including Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and her AG Dana Nessel, have continued to push for a shutdown instead, citing environmental risks to the Great Lakes. Critics of that effort say the pipeline remains vital to regional energy supplies and that the tunnel project offers a long-term solution to replace the aging dual pipelines beneath the Straits of Mackinac while maintaining a steady and secure energy supply.
Litigation over the project has been ongoing since 2019, including Governor Whitmer’s administration appealing to the Supreme Court in 2025, arguing that the state has “sovereign immunity” from Enbridge’s lawsuit to maintain operations of the pipeline. On Monday, March 30, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up Michigan’s appeal, leaving in place a lower court ruling that allows Enbridge’s case to proceed in federal court rather than state court.
Sovereignty argument hits a wall.
Attorneys for the Whitmer administration had argued that the state, whose highest court holds a Democratic majority, should control disputes over “state-owned submerged bottomlands.” But the federal courts, and now the Supreme Court by staying silent, didn’t buy the argument – and the petition was denied.
Ryan Duffy, a spokesman for Enbridge said, “The Sixth Circuit made clear that Enbridge’s suit falls within the exception to sovereign immunity.”
Danny Wimmer, a spokesman for Attorney General Dana Nessel’s office, said, ”We are disappointed by the Supreme Court’s decision not to review this important issue of state sovereignty. We will continue to fight for the people of Michigan on these vital issues concerning the Line 5 pipelines in the Straits.”
Not game over…just another round.
Despite the loss, this legal saga is far from finished. Two major fights over Line 5 are still bubbling:
- Michigan Supreme Court: This case is about whether Michigan regulators properly approved Enbridge’s plan to build a tunnel beneath the Straits of Mackinac to house the aging Line 5 pipeline. Opponents – including Native American tribes and environmental groups – argue the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) rushed or limited its review by not fully considering environmental risks, alternatives, and the broader need for the pipeline. They’re asking the Michigan Supreme Court to send the permit back for a more thorough review, while Enbridge and supporters argue the tunnel is the safest option to prevent a potential oil spill and keep energy flowing. Arguments were heard in March of 2026 and a ruling is pending.
- Federal lawsuit in Wisconsin: A separate case could ultimately determine whether Line 5 must be rerouted or shut down in parts of the Upper Midwest. It focuses on whether Enbridge is illegally operating the Line 5 pipeline across tribal land belonging to the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. The tribe is seeking to force a shutdown or reroute of the pipeline off its reservation.
A political pipe dream?
For Governor Whitmer and her anti-Enbridge Democratic colleagues, this latest setback at the Supreme Court is another reminder that courtroom wins don’t always flow as easily as campaign promises. The administration is still fighting – but for now, the Supreme Court has made one thing clear: at least one of Whitmer’s pipeline fights isn’t staying on Michigan’s home turf.
