Story perspectives

Supreme Court Weighs Michigan's Control Over Line 5 Pipeline

2/25/2026

Summary

Story summary

The U.S. Supreme Court is reviewing Michigan's effort to shut down the Line 5 pipeline under the Straits of Mackinac.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel argues the case should stay in state court, asserting state rights to manage resources.
Enbridge Energy contends the matter belongs in federal court, citing international treaty implications.
The decision could determine where climate lawsuits against oil companies are heard and affect accountability for damages.

History

Historical Context

The Line 5 pipeline, constructed in 1953, transports oil across the Great Lakes and has faced increasing scrutiny over environmental risks. In 2019, Michigan's Attorney General Dana Nessel initiated legal action to decommission part of the pipeline, citing potential pollution. This case reflects ongoing debates about federal versus state authority in resource management, echoing the 1970 Clean Water Act's establishment of environmental protections.

1 of 2

Story summary

The U.S. Supreme Court is reviewing Michigan's effort to shut down the Line 5 pipeline under the Straits of Mackinac.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel argues the case should stay in state court, asserting state rights to manage resources.
Enbridge Energy contends the matter belongs in federal court, citing international treaty implications.
The decision could determine where climate lawsuits against oil companies are heard and affect accountability for damages.

1 / 2