LANSING — The battle over Line 5 heated up again Thursday as a federal appeals court heard arguments on the proper jurisdiction for action against Enbridge.
Attorney General Dana Nessel’s case against Enbridge has dragged on since 2019 and was moved to federal court following a request from Enbridge.
The pipeline, which transports up to 540,000 barrels of oil per day, has long proven controversial and caused concerns among environmentalists. Now, the court will decide whether to send the case back to Michigan or keep it at the federal level.
This case is only about whether the issue should be heard in state or federal court. But if sent back to state court, a decision to shut down the line at least temporarily is more likely to be granted. A state court temporarily shut down Line 5 in 2020 before Enbridge requested the case be removed to federal court.
“This is a Michigan case, brought in state court under state law on behalf of the good people of the state of Michigan,” Nessel said before the hearing.
The line has long created fears of a possible spill in the Great Lakes — opponents say that the 70-year-old tunnel creates an unnecessary risk of irreparable damage to the Great Lakes and Michigan’s economy.
“Pipeline failure in the heart of the Great Lakes threatens the drinking water of 40 million people,” said David Holtz, a Sierra Club member. “Every day Line 5 continues to operate, it puts the entire region at risk — it is a ticking time bomb.
Enbridge argues that the line remains secure and safe and that the construction of a protective tunnel would ease any significant safety concerns.
A decision from the Court of Appeals could allow the battle to resume, bringing the parties one step closer to a resolution.
Before the hearing, Nessel remained outspoken in her opposition to Line 5 and said that she expected the case to be remanded back to state court.
“We think that we’ll win this case and when we do it’ll be remanded back to state court, and we can pick up where we left off with these motions for summary disposition, and hopefully be closer to resolution on this matter,” she said.
Both Nessel and Enbridge have accused the other of forum shopping, or trying to have a legal dispute heard in a favorable jurisdiction.
Enbridge spokesperson Ryan Duffy said in a statement that the company remained confident the case would remain in federal court and that the case involves an international dispute that warrants its removal from state court.
Nessel said that the Court of Appeals generally takes around three months to issue a ruling, after which the dispute over Line Five’s operation could resume.
Last year, Michigan’s utility regulator issued approval to build a tunnel around Line 5, a move that supporters of the pipeline say will help ensure its safety from possible leakage. But Nessel and environmental advocates say the approval hasn’t changed their minds on the possible dangers of the pipeline.
Nessel added that the tunnel would still take years to complete once construction was allowed to begin. The project is still awaiting an environmental impact report from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
