Federal judge rebukes Whitmer, Nessel’s bid to close Line 5

A federal judge says that Michigan can’t shutter the Line 5 pipeline, possibly ending a five-year feud between Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who teamed with Attorney General Dana Nessel to shut down the pipeline.

In 2020, Whitmer and Nessel threatened to shut down the 645-mile pipeline that stretches from Superior, Wisconsin, to Sarnia, Canada, and has carried 540,000 gallons of hydrocarbons daily underneath the Straits of Mackinac since 1953.

Whitmer and Nessel say that the pipeline is at risk for spilling oil, and have moved to revoke a 1953 easement.

Enbridge Energy owns the Line 5 pipeline and reports that it supplies 65% of the propane demand in the Upper Peninsula and 55% of Michigan’s statewide propane needs.

Congress, not Michigan, has jurisdiction over the pipeline under the Pipeline Safety Act of 1992, wrote U.S. District Judge Robert Jonker.

"Pipeline safety generally, and protection of the Straits of Mackinac, are critical interests to be sure," Jonker wrote. "But when it comes to Line 5, they are the responsibility of the United States and Michigan lacks the power to interfere."

Ryan Duffy, Enbridge spokesman, said the company welcomed the decision. 

“This ruling prevents Gov. Whitmer and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources from taking further action to shut down Line 5,” Duffy said. “The court’s decision safeguards both the United States and Canada from the significant energy disruptions that would have resulted from a closure.”

Duffy said that Michigan officials have waged war on Line 5 for over five years based on unsupported safety claims.

“The court affirmed that the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration is the exclusive federal regulator of pipeline safety. PHMSA has taken no action against Line 5, underscoring its safe operation. Enbridge has always worked closely with PHMSA and will continue to do so.”

The court also agreed with Enbridge that Michigan’s attempts to revoke the pipeline easement violates express U.S. foreign policy. Both the U.S. and Canada, the court said, “agree that a compelled pipeline shutdown of Line 5 would conflict with those domestic and foreign affairs policies.”

“Any dispute over its continued operation must be resolved through the 1977 Transit Treaty’s dispute resolution process, which Canada has already invoked. Today’s ruling makes clear that efforts by Michigan officials to permanently shut down Line 5 would interfere with U.S. foreign affairs — authority vested exclusively in the federal government,” Duffy said.

“Those who rely on Line 5 — including workers, refiners, and consumers — can be assured that this decision ensures the continued delivery of critical energy to Michigan and the region.”

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear an appeal from a separate lawsuit concerning the pipeline.