Court Rules in Favor of Permits for Controversial Pipeline Project, But Possible Hurdles Persist

Enbridge’s controversial pipeline project under the Straits of Mackinac has secured a legal win but continues to face challenges and controversy.

Key Takeaways

Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline project includes a $500 million plan to build a concrete-lined tunnel beneath Lake Michigan.
The Michigan Court of Appeals recently ruled favorably for Enbridge amid environmental groups and Native American tribes’ challenges to the project.
The tunnel project aims to address environmental concerns but faces opposition due to past incidents like the 2010 Kalamazoo River spill.
Opponents argue the project primarily benefits Canada, while posing risks to Michigan’s environment.
Critics and advocates clash over the project’s necessity and potential ramifications, with some citing renewable energy as a preferable alternative.

Enbridge’s $500 Million Pipeline Plan

Enbridge’s Line 5 project involves constructing a protective tunnel under the Straits of Mackinac to replace the aging pipeline that transports oil and natural gas. With ambitions to spend $500 million, Enbridge aims to mitigate environmental risks by embedding the pipeline within the tunnel, significantly reducing the chance of potential spills caused by external impacts.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers could expedite permits for projects like Enbridge’s under the former Trump administration’s national energy emergency executive order. This regulatory support, however, hasn’t quelled opposition. Critics, including environmentalists and several Native American groups, fear a repeat of the 2010 Kalamazoo River disaster, where an Enbridge pipeline spill severely contaminated local waterways.

A Michigan appeals court has ruled that Enbridge Energy's plans to build a tunnel around an aging pipeline that runs beneath a Great Lakes channel can continue. https://t.co/3kwv5eLx95

— 13 On Your Side (@wzzm13) February 20, 2025

Judiciary and Legal Challenges

The Michigan Court of Appeals recently upheld the permits underlining the tunnel construction plan, framing it as a vital upgrade to the current exposed pipeline. Despite this legal victory for Enbridge, contentious debates continue. Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer has pushed back against Line 5. Meanwhile, another lawsuit from 2019 is still ongoing, with a court ruling expected in the near future.

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel continues to pursue this lawsuit to decommission Line 5. This protracted courtroom battle reflects larger regional and national debates over necessary energy supply versus environmental preservation, alongside ongoing deliberations on cost-benefit scales. Some observers suggest the fight over the pipeline could reach the state Supreme Court.

A Contentious Future

The Enbridge project steps into a future rife with debates over Michigan’s environmental stewardship, national energy needs, and Indigenous rights. Proponents of the pipeline argue its economic benefits and job creation opportunities, supported by certain energy companies, unions, and business groups. Countering this perspective, environmental advocates highlight renewable energy opportunities.

As these issues unfold, Enbridge commits to shouldering the financial responsibility for tunnel and pipeline construction under a 99-year lease agreement with the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority. State Supreme Court considerations could come in the future, with Enbridge and its opponents presenting their visions of responsibility and environmental safety in the looming trials.