Supreme Court Rules Against Enbridge in Michigan Effort to Close Line 5 Pipeline — OPIS

The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled against Enbridge's efforts to move a case seeking to shut down the Line 5 pipeline from Michigan state court.

In a unanimous decision, the high court ruled the Canadian company had waited too long to seek the move to a federal court. While the law allows for case participants to seek a change of venue within 30 days of a case being filed, Enbridge waited 887 days, according to the decision by Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

"The Court of Appeals therefore correctly held that Enbridge's notice of removal was untimely and that this action must be remanded to the Michigan state court," Sotomayor wrote in the 18-page decision.

The rulin is a defeat for Enbridge, which has long argued that its operation of the 540,000 b/d pipeline is a federal, not state, matter. Enbridge says federal law and a treaty with Canada govern pipeline operations and Michigan does not have the authority to order a shutdown.

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, a Democrat who had campaigned on a pledge to shut the pipeline, is seeking to close an underwater section of Line 5 in the Straits of Mackinac. Nessel argues Enbridge has violated the terms of its state lease on the property and that the pipeline poses the risk of a catastrophic spill into the Great Lakes.

Nessel filed suit in state court in 2019, but that case was put on hold after Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer filed her own suit against the pipeline.

Whitmer's case was eventually moved to federal court, where a judge in December dismissed it.

Enbridge had also been successful in moving Nessel's case to federal court, but the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered it sent back to state court because Enbridge had missed the 30-day deadline. Enbridge appealed the ruling to the high court, which heard arguments in February.

The pipeline supplies light crude and NGLs to refineries in the Midwest and Canada.

The possibility of a shutdown disrupting such supplies led the Canadian government to invoke its treaty with the United States governing pipeline operations.

Those international considerations mean that even if Enbridge were to lose the case in Michigan court, it would likely appeal such a ruling in federal court.

During the February arguments, the high court justices had questioned attorneys representing Michigan over whether Nessel would immediately seek to shut the pipeline if she won the state court case. The attorneys said they couldn't say.

This content was created by Oil Price Information Service, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. OPIS is run independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal.

-- Reporting by Steve Cronin, scronin@opisnet.com; Editing by Michael Kelly, mkelly@opisnet.com

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

April 22, 2026 17:09 ET (21:09 GMT)