Tag: Line 5

FLOW Appeals Line 5 Tunnel Permit Decision to Michigan Supreme Court

For Love of Water (FLOW), a leading Great Lakes water protection organization, along with four Michigan Tribes and other environmental advocates, have filed an Application for Leave to Appeal with the Michigan Supreme Court, challenging a decision by the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) and a subsequent ruling by the Court of Appeals regarding Enbridge Energy’s Line 5 pipeline tunnel project.

We’re fighting to protect the Great Lakes from an oil spill. Donate today to support this important legal work:


The case, In re APPLICATION OF ENBRIDGE ENERGY TO REPLACE & RELOCATE LINE 5 (pdf), concerns the MPSC’s decision to permit Enbridge to construct and operate a proposed 4.1-mile tunnel housing a petroleum pipeline under and through the Great Lakes bottomlands in the Straits of Mackinac (MPSC Case No. U-20763).

The Significance of the Straits:

FLOW’s appeal emphasizes the profound significance of the Straits of Mackinac, a site of deep and enduring importance to the region. The Straits hold historical significance for Native American tribes who have inhabited the area for thousands of years, and are a vital economic, cultural, recreational, and ecological resource for Michiganders. The MPSC’s permitting decision, affirmed by the Court of Appeals, directly impacts each of these interests.

The Central Legal Question:

FLOW’s appeal centers on a critical legal question: Does the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) have a duty to apply the public trust doctrine when making decisions about the Line 5 pipeline and its potential impact on the Great Lakes, even if the Michigan Legislature has not expressly empowered it to do so?

The public trust doctrine is a fundamental principle of environmental law, recognized by the Michigan Supreme Court for over a century. It establishes the state’s inalienable obligation to protect and preserve public rights of fishing, hunting, swimming, and navigation upon public trust lands and within public trust waters, including the Great Lakes and their bottomlands.

FLOW’s Argument:

FLOW argues that the Court of Appeals erred in concluding that the MPSC is a legislatively created entity without common law powers, and thus has no obligation or authority to apply the public trust doctrine. FLOW contends that this conclusion fundamentally misapprehends the nature of the public trust doctrine, which is rooted in state sovereignty and the long history of the common law, and ignores long-standing precedent. This decision stands in stark conflict with the Michigan Supreme Court’s Glass v. Goeckel decision affirming that “[t]he public trust doctrine is alive and well in Michigan.”

The decision undermines the state’s public trust duty and obligation to protect the people of Michigan and their invaluable public trust resources. The MPSC’s decision and the Court of Appeals ruling weaken Michigan’s ability to safeguard the Great Lakes.

“The Great Lakes are a public resource of incalculable value,” said FLOW Legal Director Carrie La Seur. “The MPSC has a fundamental responsibility to protect these waters, and its decision-making must be guided by the public trust doctrine. The Court of Appeals’ ruling dangerously undermines that responsibility.”

Significance of the Appeal:

This appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court is of paramount importance because it directly addresses the scope of the MPSC’s responsibility to protect the Great Lakes. The Supreme Court’s decision will determine whether the MPSC can make decisions that potentially endanger these waters without fully considering the state’s fundamental obligations under the public trust doctrine. A ruling in favor of FLOW would reaffirm existing precedent, ensuring that state agencies across Michigan prioritize the protection of the Great Lakes in all their decisions and empowering the public to hold these agencies accountable for safeguarding these vital resources.

“This case strikes at the core of our mission at For Love of Water. As sovereign, the state of Michigan (including all three branches of government) has a perpetual obligation to protect and preserve the waters of the Great Lakes and the lands beneath them for the public, and the Straits of Mackinac connecting Lakes Michigan and Huron are at the very heart of this precious natural gift,” said FLOW Executive Director, Liz Kirkwood.

###

For Love of Water (FLOW) is a nonpartisan 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization based in Traverse City, Michigan. Our mission is to ensure the waters of the Great Lakes Basin are healthy, public, and protected for all. With a staff of legal and policy experts, writers, and community builders, FLOW is a trusted resource for Great Lakes advocates. We help communities, businesses, agencies, and legislators make informed policy decisions and protect public trust rights to water. Learn more at www.forloveofwater.org.

Michigan Court of Appeals Affirms Line 5 Tunnel Permit

Michigan Court of Appeals Affirms Line 5 Tunnel Permit; FLOW Asserts Michigan’s Public Trust Responsibilities

 

Traverse City, Mich.— For Love of Water (FLOW) participated in consolidated appeals challenging a Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) order conditionally approving Enbridge Energy’s application to replace the segment of its Line 5 pipeline under the Straits of Mackinac, constructing a new pipeline within a proposed tunnel. On February 19, the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the MPSC’s order.

Background: Following a series of agreements between Enbridge and the State of Michigan, and the creation of the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority (MSCA) by the state legislature to oversee tunnel construction, Enbridge sought MPSC authorization for the “Replacement Project”. In 2024, MPSC issued a permit.

Appellants’ Arguments: The appellants (environmental groups, tribes, and an individual) argued that the MPSC erred by:

  • Limiting its review to the public need for the replacement segment rather than the entire Line 5 pipeline.
  • Using improper comparisons in its Michigan Environmental Protection Act (MEPA) analysis.
  • Inadequately analyzing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

In addition, FLOW argued that Michigan has sovereign public trust responsibilities that cannot be waived legislatively through the delegation of a public policy decision to an agency.

The Court’s decision held that:

  1. The MPSC properly limited its review to the Replacement Project, as the application concerned only that specific segment. The need for the entire Line 5 had been previously established.
  2. The MPSC’s MEPA analysis was sufficient. While the court noted some inconsistencies in comparisons (e.g., comparing rail alternatives for the entire line but not the existing pipeline), it concluded that the MPSC ultimately considered all presented alternatives and that its decision was supported by the record.
  3. Because the MPSC has only the authority created in it by the Legislature, it has no duty to consider the public trust in its decisions.

FLOW Legal Director Carrie La Seur said, “We stand by our argument that the MPSC failed to make the determinations required under MEPA and improperly excluded critical evidence offered by the intervenors. Michigan’s public trust guardianship is codified in MEPA and the Michigan Constitution, which apply to all agency actions. Just like a tenant has no right to give away a rented house, the Legislature has no right to hand over its public trust responsibilities. The state holds Michigan waters in trust for all Michiganders, in perpetuity. They are not for sale.”

FLOW is likely to appeal this decision.

Tribes, Environmental Groups Urge Michigan Appeals Court to Reverse Enbridge Line 5 Tunnel Permit Approval

January 14, 2025

Lansing, Mich. – Today, attorneys representing several tribal nations and environmental groups asked the Michigan Court of Appeals to reverse the Michigan Public Service Commission’s flawed December 2023 order approving a permit for Enbridge to build a tunnel for its Line 5 oil pipeline beneath the lakebed of the Straits of Mackinac. Separate legal challenges were brought before the Commission by the tribes and environmental groups, who appealed the Commission’s decision to greenlight the permit. Those appeals were consolidated and argued today before the Court of Appeals.

The Bay Mills Indian Community, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, Little Traverse Bay Band of Odawa Indians, and Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi have lived on the lands of present-day Michigan since time immemorial and hold deep spiritual, cultural, and economic connections to the Straits of Mackinac. They argue that the Commissioners unlawfully barred key evidence about the public need for Line 5 and about the risk of future oil spills along the pipeline’s length.

“Michiganders do not need this pipeline to keep pumping oil through the heart of the Great Lakes,” said Attorney Adam Ratchenski for Earthjustice, which is representing the Tribes alongside the Native American Rights Fund (NARF). “The Commission was so eager to rubber-stamp this massive project for Enbridge that they refused to consider the atrocious record of oil spills along this failing pipeline while making a decision that would secure its operation – and all the pollution that comes with it – for up to 99 years.”

The Environmental Law & Policy Center (ELPC) and Michigan Climate Action Network (MiCAN) asserted in court that the Commission failed to consider that Enbridge’s proposed project poses a dangerous threat for a catastrophic oil spill in the Great Lakes, increases climate change impacts, and undermines Michigan’s clean energy transition goals. They urged the Court of Appeals to set aside the Commission’s permit decision and require further review and analysis of environmental impacts and alternatives consistent with the requirements of the Michigan Environmental Protection Act (MEPA).

“The reality is that we are moving away from fossil fuels. We have to, if we are to have any chance of avoiding a climate disaster,” said Denise Keele, MiCAN’s executive director. “The last thing we need in Michigan is construction of a new fossil fuel infrastructure like a new pipeline under the Straits, which would lock in more reliance on oil. The Commission’s initial approval of the Enbridge tunnel project must be reversed if we want a realistic shot at shifting to clean energy in Michigan and ending our reliance on dirty fossil fuels.”

FLOW Legal Director Carrie La Seur gives oral arguments in the Michigan Court of Appeals (January 14, 2025)

“Today we argued that the Commission must require Enbridge to properly quantify and evaluate greenhouse gas pollution and climate change impacts in line with the Michigan Environmental Protection Act,” said David Scott, Senior attorney at ELPC. “The Commission must also fully and fairly assess the public need and feasible alternatives to the proposed tunnel that would avoid climate risks and conserve Michigan’s natural resources. The Commission failed to do that before approving the permit.”

“Enbridge’s Line 5 tunnel proposal is a desperate effort to suck the last few pennies of corporate profit from an aged-out pipeline, while socializing the cost of vast new fossil fuel infrastructure,” said For Love of Water (FLOW) Legal Director Carrie La Seur. “If Enbridge really cared about oil spills, it would respect Governor Whitmer’s statesmanlike decision to protect the Great Lakes by withdrawing the easement. FLOW argued today that the MPSC’s analysis of tunnel alternatives is fatally flawed, because it ignores the likelihood that market realities will shut down the pipeline long before consumers have paid for a multi-billion dollar tunnel through price hikes.”

Risky, costly, and ill-advised: New report and webinar analyzes the Enbridge Line 5 tunnel project

WATCH THE WEBINAR RECORDING

 

Enbridge’s plan to bore a tunnel between Lake Michigan and Lake Huron to replace an underwater segment of Line 5 is costly and ill-advised, according to a new report from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA). The report shows that the aging pipeline is servicing a shrinking market and is facing additional challenges that will make it costly to maintain operations. The report also shows that the pipeline tunnel will likely be more costly than project proponents have disclosed publicly to date. IEEFA’s analysis concludes that Enbridge should question whether it makes sense to keep sinking money into an old pipeline when markets for its products are on a declining trajectory. Download the report.

Live Webinar: January 15 at 12:00pm EST

FLOW will host a free, live webinar with IEEFA report co-authors Suzanne Mattei, Energy Policy Analyst; and David Schlissel, Director of Resource Planning Analysis. We’ll talk about the report’s findings and answer your questions. The webinar will be moderated by FLOW Legal Director Carrie La Seur.

About IEEFA

The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) examines issues related to energy markets, trends, and policies. The Institute’s mission is to accelerate the transition to a diverse, sustainable and profitable energy economy. IEEFA’s nonpartisan and evidence-based approach provides solid ground on which to base sound investment and policy decisions and to challenge misinformation.

Webinar Guest Speakers

Suzanne Mattei is an attorney with over 30 years of experience in public interest law and policy. She has analyzed the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s policies related to interstate pipeline approval. She has also conducted research on blue hydrogen, petrochemical projects, gas flaring and fossil fuel extraction on public lands.

Suzanne is a former regional director for the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, where she supervised permitting and enforcement in New York City, with an area population of about 8 million.

Previously, in City government oversight positions, her analysis helped spur the City to abandon a risky plan to sell its drinking water supply system to a state-run authority and to reject a costly, ill-advised plan to build garbage incinerators. Her investigation on behalf of Sierra Club exposed the federal government’s failure to curb exposure to pollution from the 9/11 World Trade Center disaster. Her testimony to Congress helped lead to a law that aids 9/11 responders and survivors.

Suzanne helped to establish free legal assistance and secure federal aid for bereaved families after the 9/11 disaster, and for Ground Zero workers suffering from negative health impacts.

She has a juris doctor degree from Yale University and B.A. from Washington State University. She is admitted to practice law in New York.

David Schlissel is an IEEFA analyst with 50 years of experience as an economic and technical consultant on energy and environmental issues.

He has testified as an expert witness before regulatory commissions in more than 35 states and before the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Schlissel’s work has included researching, writing and testifying about the U.S. nuclear industry and the cost overruns, construction delays and other challenges associated with many nuclear projects. He has engineering degrees from MIT and Stanford University as well as a Juris Doctor from Stanford Law School. He also has studied nuclear engineering at MIT in a non-degree program.

FLOW, GLBN, and Sierra Club file joint amici brief in Nessel v. Enbridge lawsuit

FLOW, Great Lakes Business Network, and Sierra Club File Joint Amici Brief in Nessel v. Enbridge Lawsuit, Dismantling Enbridge’s Allegations and Defending State Sovereignty

 

Contact:
Carrie La Seur, FLOW Legal Director
carrie@flowforwater.org
(231) 944-1568

Traverse City, Mich. – On December 2, 2024, For Love of Water (FLOW), Great Lakes Business Network (GLBN), and Sierra Club filed an amici curiae brief opposing Enbridge’s motion for summary disposition in the Line 5 lawsuit Nessel v. Enbridge. The three groups, representing tens of thousands of Michigan residents and hundreds of Michigan businesses, weighed in as “friends of the court”, arguing that Michigan has both the power and the duty to protect publicly held bottomlands in the Straits of Mackinac from the urgent threat of a pipeline breach.

The amici brief makes the case that the 1977 Transit Pipelines Treaty between the US and Canada explicitly reserves for the states the authority to regulate cross-border pipelines in the area of environmental protection. AG Nessel’s complaint targets the failing underwater section of Line 5, wholly within Michigan’s sovereign territory. Pointing out how Enbridge has misread the treaty, lawyers for FLOW, GLBN, and Sierra Club outlined how the U.S. Supreme Court has long held that the Constitution protects traditional states’ rights and responsibilities – including the responsibility to protect public trust resources like the Great Lakes.

The Line 5 controversy indeed exposes a threat to the prudent conduct of our nation’s foreign policy – and that threat is Enbridge. Hiding behind the cloak of the foreign affairs doctrine, Enbridge seeks a judicial stamp of approval for a new U.S. foreign policy – one that would privilege a foreign oil company’s uninterruptible flow of hydrocarbons over the sovereign rights and responsibilities of the states.

FLOW Legal Director Carrie La Seur said, “With this week’s filing, our coalition again stands with AG Nessel to defend Michigan’s priceless natural heritage from an urgent threat.”

Andy Buchsbaum, the Great Lakes Business Network’s attorney stated, “Enbridge continues to try to stop Michigan’s top law enforcement officer from preventing a massive oil spill in the Great Lakes that would devastate millions of people and thousands of businesses. That’s shocking, and we can’t let it happen. Great Lakes businesses are standing up for the Great Lakes in court, before Congress and wherever else we need to be.”

FLOW, GLBN, and Sierra Club separately briefed the court in 2019 and 2021, arguing for Michigan’s sovereignty and public trust rights, and detailing irreparable harm that would befall the region’s economic security and quality of life if the judicial relief sought by AG Nessel – the revocation of the Line 5 easement and the shut down of Line 5 – is not granted before Line 5 ruptures.

“We appreciate Attorney General Nessel continuing to fight for protecting our Great Lakes and the people of Michigan from a pending oil spill disaster,” said Elayne Coleman, Sierra Club – Michigan Chapter Director. “Enbridge has thrown millions of dollars into their efforts to undermine Michigan’s right to oversee our public trust. We’re not going to bend to a Canadian oil giant, and we’re glad Attorney General Nessel isn’t backing down, either.”

[ Download Amici Brief (PDF) ]

###

For Love of Water (FLOW) is a nonpartisan 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization based in Traverse City, Michigan. Our mission is to ensure the waters of the Great Lakes Basin are healthy, public, and protected for all. With a staff of legal and policy experts, writers, and community builders, FLOW is a trusted resource for Great Lakes advocates. We help communities, businesses, agencies, and legislators make informed policy decisions and protect public trust rights to water. Learn more at www.forloveofwater.org

The Great Lakes Business Network is a coalition of businesses dedicated to preserving the integrity and vitality of the Great Lakes, fostering sustainable business practices, and advocating for policies that protect the environment and the economy of the Great Lakes region. It is co-managed by National Wildlife Federation and Groundwork for Resilient Communities. Learn more at glbusinessnetwork.com

Sierra Club is America’s largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization, with more than 3.5 million members and supporters. In addition to protecting every person’s right to get outdoors and access the healing power of nature, the Sierra Club works to promote clean energy, safeguard the health of our communities, protect wildlife, and preserve our remaining wild places through grassroots activism, public education, lobbying, and legal action. For more information, visit www.sierraclub.org.

###

FLOW & GLBN Brief: Michigan has Sovereign Right and Duty to Protect Great Lakes Waters and Bottomlands

Download the amici brief [filed October 22, 2024]

Traverse City, Mich.—On October 22, FLOW (For Love of Water) and Great Lakes Business Network (GLBN) filed a brief calling on the U.S. Court of Appeals to stop a pipeline company from stripping away Michigan’s power to protect the Great Lakes.

Enbridge Energy, which owns the dual Line 5 pipelines, launched the 2020 federal lawsuit Enbridge v. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in defiance of Governor Whitmer’s 2020 order revoking an easement for the Line 5 across the Straits of Mackinac bottomlands. FLOW and GLBN’s brief supports the appeal by the State of Michigan to reverse the July 5, 2024 order by Judge Robert J. Jonker of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan denying Gov. Whitmer’s motion to dismiss on sovereign immunity grounds. The denial, if upheld on appeal, would allow Enbridge to continue its litigation that absurdly asserts that federal law precludes the State of Michigan from enforcing its public trust rights and responsibilities regarding Enbridge’s dangerous operation of Line 5 on State-owned submerged lands at the Straits of Mackinac.

Built in 1953, Line 5 is a 71-year-old dual oil and gas pipeline exposed to fierce currents where Lake Michigan and Lake Huron meet. Ships’ anchors have repeatedly struck the pipelines and cables dragged by passing vessels have damaged the pipelines and their supports. A rupture could irreversibly harm the priceless national treasure of the Great Lakes, and cause billions of dollars of damage to the regional economy.

Not long after Enbridge filed its federal court lawsuit opposing the state’s authority to protect public trust waters, Governor Whitmer moved to dismiss the action, on the grounds that Michigan officials have immunity under the U.S. Constitution’s Eleventh Amendment from federal lawsuits that would encumber the State of Michigan’s ownership of, and jurisdiction over, submerged Great Lakes bottomlands, and interfere with Michigan’s ability to manage those lands in accordance with its public trust responsibilities. Judge Jonker held, we think wrongfully, that an exception applies allowing private parties to sue individual state officials in federal court if they are allegedly violating federal law.

In its amicus brief, FLOW and GLBN argue that Enbridge’s lawsuit against the state impairs state sovereign and public trust powers that are critical to the protection of the Great Lakes. The public trust doctrine, which was encoded in Michigan law over 100 years ago, holds that the waters and bottomlands of the Great Lakes within Michigan’s borders are held in trust by the State for the benefit of the people of Michigan, not for private interests. Long-standing legal principles that balance federal and state sovereign interests weigh in favor of states’ rights and jurisdiction over the public navigable waters and bottomlands of the Great Lakes to protect these precious resources.

As an advocacy organization committed to protecting precious state sovereign water resources, FLOW was granted permission to file a “friend of the court” or “amicus” brief, to provide the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals with our unique perspective, knowledge, and experience regarding Michigan and Great Lakes states’ sovereign ownership of public lands and water resources under the public trust doctrine.

The Great Lakes Business Network joins FLOW in this amici brief in support of the State of Michigan, asking the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse the District Court and order dismissal of Enbridge’s unsupportable lawsuit.

14 years ago: Enbridge oil spill disaster in Marshall, MI

July 25, 2024 marks the 14th anniversary of one of the largest inland oil spills in U.S. history, which happened just three months after the BP Horizon Gulf Spill. On July 25, 2010, a pipeline operated by Enbridge – the same corporation operating the risky Line 5 in the Straits of Mackinac – burst and released dirty tar sands oil into Talmadge Creek, a tributary of the Kalamazoo River. Nearly forty miles of the Kalamazoo River were closed for cleanup until June 2012. Enbridge paid more than $177 million in penalties and was required to improve safety measures. The estimated cost of the cleanup was more than $1 billion.

Corrosion fatigue – poor maintenance by Enbridge – was cited as the underlying cause of the catastrophic breach by the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board. NTSB Chair Deborah Hersman compared Enbridge’s inept handling of the spill to the Keystone Kops.

“Why didn’t they recognize what was happening, and what took so long?” she asked.

Enbridge recently came under further scrutiny, as in July 2024 the US Department of Justice proposed modifications to its consent decree with Enbridge. The consent decree is a legally-binding settlement agreement that requires Enbridge to improve pipeline repair and maintenance issues. The consent decree resolved the lawsuit United States v. Enbridge Energy, which arose from failures of Enbridge pipelines in Marshall, Michigan and Romeoville, Illinois. The proposed modifications would require Enbridge to reassess previously identified cracks in the Lakehead pipeline system – of which Line 5 is a part.

Fourteen years after Marshall, Enbridge still hasn’t learned its lesson. We shouldn’t need the federal government to compel Enbridge to use the most up-to-date tools and rigorous methods to inspect and maintain its pipelines.

Meanwhile, the people who lived through the oil spill disaster in Marshall continue to live with its ramifications. Enbridge purchased 150 residences near the spill site, uprooting hundreds of people from their homes. Childhoods were disrupted. Generations-old homesteads were sacrificed on the altar of Enbridge’s recklessness. The plans, dreams, and security of a community were ruptured like a weak, faulty pipe. We’ll never know all of their stories. With the purchase of their properties, Enbridge bought their silence — by requiring Non-Disclosure Agreements as part of the terms.


Register for our upcoming webinar on August 20:
Enbridge Line 5: Trouble Under the Surface

WEBINAR // Enbridge Line 5: Trouble Under the Surface

Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline is over 71 years old and remains a threat to the waters and people of the Great Lakes region.

On August 20, join FLOW and Oil & Water Don’t Mix for a special live webinar, and learn from a panel of experts and advocates about recent developments in the legal fight to shut down Line 5 and bring an end to Enbridge’s continuous trespass on state and sovereign indigenous lands. We’ll also talk about how coalition partners are working together at the state, local, and federal level, and how you can join the campaign to shut down Line 5, and take audience questions.

Our expert panel includes:

  • Riyaz Kanji, founding member and Directing Attorney of Kanji & Katzen – representing the Bad River Band
  • Mahyar Sorour, Deputy Legislative Director for Beyond Dirty Fuels at the Sierra Club
  • Sean McBrearty, Campaign Coordinator, Oil & Water Don’t Mix and Michigan State Director at Clean Water Action

Hosted by FLOW Executive Director Liz Kirkwood, and moderated by Senior Legal Advisor Skip Pruss.

This online webinar is free, and supported in part by a grant award from the Mackinac Island Community Foundation’s Natural Resources and Preservation Fund. Register online at www.ForLoveOfWater.org/pipeline.

ABOUT THE SPEAKERS

Riyaz Kanji, Founding Member and Directing Attorney, Kanji & Katzen​

Riyaz Kanji is a founding member of Kanji & Katzen, PLLC, a firm whose mission is to advance Tribal sovereignty. A graduate of Harvard College and the Yale Law School, Riyaz served as a law clerk to the late Honorable Betty Fletcher of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and Justice David Souter of the United States Supreme Court. He is an advisor to and vocal cheerleader for the Tribal Supreme Court Project. Riyaz represents Tribes at all levels of the federal court system, and was part of the team that argued and won the decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma vindicating the continued existence of the Muscogee Creek Reservation.

Sean McBrearty is the Campaign Coordinator for the Oil & Water Don’t Mix campaign and Legislative and Policy Director at Michigan Clean Water Action, where he works on water infrastructure, oil and gas, and drinking water issues. Mr. McBrearty has served as a leader in the campaign to decommission Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline for the past six years. He learned the importance of protecting drinking water and our environment from a young age, growing up in a community devastated by perennial droughts and poor water and air quality in California’s Central Valley

Mahyar is a Director on the Sierra Club’s Federal Policy Team based in Washington, D.C. She manages the development and implementation of legislative and administrative advocacy efforts with the Sierra Club’s Beyond Dirty Fuels Campaign. She has a background in environmental justice, policy, and grassroots organizing; working on issues related to air and water quality; energy policy; and legislative and advocacy training. 

The event is brought to you by:

FLOW applauds decision sending Nessel v. Enbridge Line 5 case back to state court

FLOW (For Love of Water) applauds the federal Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision yesterday sending Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s legal action against Enbridge’s Line 5 back to state court where it started. In 2019, AG Nessel sought a court order to shut down Enbridge’s failing Line 5 crude oil and natural gas pipeline. In 2020, Governor Whitmer revoked Enbridge’s easement. As a result, Line 5 now illegally occupies the Lake Michigan lakebed at the Straits of Mackinac, and presents a clear and present danger of a catastrophic spill into the Great Lakes.

Now the Sixth Circuit has held that Enbridge’s removal of AG Nessel’s lawsuit to federal court, more than two years after it was filed, was untimely and unjustified. Enbridge’s attempt to take the lawsuit to federal court came well after the deadline for removal, and the Sixth Circuit ruled that the delay could not be justified on any of the grounds cited by Enbridge or the lower court. Enbridge’s delay tactic of removal is typical of fossil fuel companies being held to account by state authorities, and it failed here.

FLOW has vigorously supported AG Nessel throughout this procedural odyssey, including submitting an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief to the Sixth Circuit. FLOW is confident that at a trial on the merits, the AG will demonstrate the monstrous and unacceptable threat the 70-year-old Line 5 poses to the precious clean water resources of the Great Lakes, and achieve the shutdown remedy she and Governor Whitmer have so vigilantly pursued. FLOW and its many supporters and allies remain committed to this goal, and we are grateful for the leadership of AG Nessel and Gov. Whitmer in this fight.

###

FLOW is an independent, 501(c)(3) nonprofit that serves as a Great Lakes water law and policy center dedicated to ensuring the waters of the Great Lakes Basin are healthy, public, and protected for all. The enduring idea of the commons and legal principles of the public trust offer unifying adaptive solutions to address basin-wide threats. FLOW’s staff of legal and policy experts, journalists, and community-builders makes FLOW an authoritative resource for Great Lakes advocates. FLOW builds a knowledge base for communities, state agencies, and legislators to inform policy and advocacy for water issues.

Recent Line 5 News

Line 5: A Closer Look