Michigan Supreme Court to Review Enbridge Line 5 Tunnel Project

News Summary

The Michigan Supreme Court will examine the state permit for the proposed Enbridge Line 5 oil tunnel, as environmental groups and tribal nations challenge its approval. Critics claim the Michigan Public Service Commission inadequately considered environmental risks. The decision, announced on September 19, marks a significant moment for those opposing the billion-dollar project affecting the Straits of Mackinac. The Supreme Court’s findings could impact future energy infrastructure and public trust in natural resource management.

Michigan – The Michigan Supreme Court has agreed to review a contentious state permit for a proposed billion-dollar oil tunnel beneath the Straits of Mackinac. This decision comes as opponents of the Enbridge Line 5 tunnel project continue to challenge the approval, which was upheld by a lower court. The court’s ruling to hear the appeal was announced on September 19, raising hopes among environmental advocates and state tribal nations who argue the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) failed to adequately assess environmental impacts when they approved the permit in 2023.

The proposed tunnel would span 3.6 miles and is meant to house a rebuilt section of the Line 5 pipeline, which currently transports petroleum products from Wisconsin to Ontario through Michigan’s two peninsulas. The MPSC originally authorized the relocation of the pipeline into the new tunnel earlier this year, a decision that was subsequently upheld by the Michigan Court of Appeals in February.

In its examination of the case, the Michigan Supreme Court will consider whether the appellate judges afforded too much deference to the MPSC, and if they neglected to independently evaluate the potential risks to Michigan’s air, water, natural resources, and public trust associated with the project. Additionally, the court will scrutinize whether the MPSC failed to include evidence related to the history and risks of oil spills near the existing Line 5 pipeline, which has a controversial track record.

The court’s review will also look into whether the MPSC should have adhered to the public trust doctrine, which obligates the management of natural resources like the Great Lakes for public benefit, preventing substantial harm for private uses.

Supporters of the Enbridge project contend that the permitting process was comprehensive and in line with Michigan law. The company has maintained that Line 5 is structurally sound and claims to have reached an agreement for the tunnel during the administration of former Governor Rick Snyder. Furthermore, legislative measures established by Republicans in 2018 formed the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority to oversee the tunnel’s construction and ownership.

At the federal level, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is conducting its own review of the project. This environmental review, initiated under an expedited process following an executive order by President Donald Trump declaring a national energy emergency, is expected to reach a final decision this fall. However, six Michigan Indigenous tribes have withdrawn from cooperating with this review, citing concerns about bias in the Army Corps’ procedures. They argue that the construction and operation of the tunnel could potentially harm a tribal archeological district in the Straits, where Ice Age artifacts were recently uncovered.

Environmental groups and state tribal nations remain vocal opponents of the tunnel project, pointing out the inadequacies in assessing ecological risks. Carrie La Seur, an attorney with the organization For Love of Water (FlOW), emphasizes that the Supreme Court case is critical for the protection of the Great Lakes.

Business groups and labor unions support the project, contending that it is essential for maintaining energy market stability throughout the Midwest and for the protection of the Great Lakes during energy transportation. Meanwhile, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel is embroiled in ongoing litigation against Enbridge, stemming from a 2020 executive order by Governor Gretchen Whitmer to shut down the original pipeline under the straits. The U.S. Supreme Court is also set to examine whether Nessel’s case should be addressed in federal or state court.

The noise surrounding the Enbridge Line 5 tunnel project reflects broader discussions on energy infrastructure, environmental protection, and indigenous rights, setting the stage for a legal battle that could have significant implications for the future of one of North America’s most important freshwater resources.

Deeper Dive: News & Info About This Topic

• Detroit News
• Wikipedia: Enbridge Line 5
• MLive
• Google Search: Line 5 tunnel Michigan
• Upper Michigan’s Source
• Google Scholar: Enbridge Line 5
• Detroit Free Press
• Encyclopedia Britannica: Enbridge Line 5