U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Michigan's Sovereign Immunity Challenge in Line 5 Pipeline Lawsuit

The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected Michigan's final effort to dismiss Enbridge Energy's federal lawsuit challenging Governor Gretchen Whitmer's 2020 order revoking Line 5's easement to cross beneath the Straits of Mackinac.

On Monday, the high court issued an order declining to hear Governor Whitmer's petition claiming the state was constitutionally shielded from being forced into federal court by the energy company. The decision comes after two lower courts found that the 11th Amendment, which limits when states could be sued in federal court, did not protect Michigan in this case.

"We are disappointed by the Supreme Court's decision not to review this important issue of state sovereignty," said Danny Wimmer, press secretary for Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel (D), in a statement Monday.

The U.S. Supreme Court building is pictured. Francis Chung/POLITICO

The Supreme Court's rejection marks the latest development in the sprawling litigation over Line 5, which transports crude oil and natural gas from Michigan to Canada. The project has provoked several lawsuits from the state and tribes as Whitmer seeks to protect the Straits of Mackinac where a portion of the pipeline crosses.

Enbridge Energy has proposed replacing the aging Line 5 with a new pipeline inside a tunnel beneath the lake bed. The company argues that the tunnel would make the pipeline safer under the straits, and everyone, including the other side of this case, agrees that the pipes and the Great Lakes ecosystem are better off if they're in the protective tunnel, according to an Enbridge representative.

For years, environmental groups have pushed to shut down Line 5 entirely. They say an oil spill in the Straits of Mackinac would be devastating across the Great Lakes. The Michigan Supreme Court's ruling in a separate case regarding the tunnel project, potentially determining the future of the pipeline, is expected in the coming months as it balances safeguarding the Great Lakes and keeping fuel flowing across the region.

The Michigan Supreme Court is now weighing in on whether state regulators did enough to protect the environment when they approved Enbridge's tunnel project. Canadian pipeline company Enbridge wants to replace the aging Line 5 with a new pipeline inside a tunnel beneath the lake bed.

The Michigan Supreme Court's decision in that case is expected in the coming months as it balances safeguarding the Great Lakes and keeping fuel flowing across the region. The ruling could potentially determine the future of the pipeline.

Enbridge says the tunnel would make the pipeline safer under the straits. "Everyone, including the other side of this case, agrees that the pipes and the Great Lakes ecosystem are better off if they're in the protective tunnel," an Enbridge representative said.

This Supreme Court decision effectively ends Michigan's attempt to use sovereign immunity as a defense in the federal lawsuit over Line 5. The state must now proceed in federal court to challenge Enbridge's federal lawsuit, which challenges Whitmer's 2020 order revoking the pipeline's easement to cross beneath the Straits of Mackinac.

The Supreme Court's order rejecting Whitmer's petition was issued on Monday. The high court declined to hear the state's case claiming that it was constitutionally shielded from a federal suit over its order revoking an easement for Line 5.

The justices declined to hear the state's sovereign immunity pipeline fight, according to E&E News by POLITICO. The Supreme Court has rejected Governor Whitmer's final effort to toss out Enbridge Energy's federal lawsuit.

The decision comes after two lower courts found that the 11th Amendment did not protect Michigan in this case, finding that the state could be sued in federal court despite its sovereign immunity claims.

This development represents a significant setback for the state's legal strategy in the Line 5 dispute. The Supreme Court's rejection means Michigan cannot use the 11th Amendment as a defense to dismiss Enbridge's federal lawsuit challenging Whitmer's 2020 order.