A coalition of Wisconsin environmental advocacy groups filed a lawsuit Monday challenging an administrative law judge’s decision to uphold the Department of Natural Resource’s permit approval to reroute the Enbridge Line 5 oil pipeline across northern Wisconsin. 

The petition, filed in Iron County Circuit Court by Clean Wisconsin and Midwest Environmental Advocates on behalf of the Sierra Club, 350 Wisconsin and the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin, argues that the administrative law judge ignored extensive evidence that the pipeline reroute will damage local waterways. 

A similar lawsuit has also been filed by the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. The tribe for years has fought against the pipeline, which currently runs across its land. The reroute is happening because a federal judge previously ruled the pipeline must be moved off tribal land, but the tribe argues the new proposed route will continue to harm its water resources. 

The administrative judge upheld the DNR’s permit decision after six weeks of hearings last year. The petitions from the environmental groups and the tribe move the case from the administrative legal process to the state’s court system. Separately, a challenge has been made against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Line 5 permit decisions. 

“We are more committed than ever to protecting Wisconsin’s waters from the irreversible harm this project threatens to cause. We believe the administrative ruling incorrectly decided critical legal and factual issues, and we are confident that our efforts to hold DNR and Enbridge accountable to Wisconsin’s environmental laws will ultimately be vindicated,” MEA Senior Staff Attorney Rob Lee said in a statement.

On Friday, an administrative law judge upheld a permit issued by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources last year to allow the Canadian oil company Enbridge to build 41 miles of new pipeline in northern Wisconsin. The current rerouted path for Enbridge’s Line 5 would mean that although the pipeline would avoid the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa reservation, it would still go through the Bad River’s watershed. 

The judge’s decision is likely to be appealed, and the Bad River Band is continuing to challenge the pipeline project in federal court. But the approval of the DNR’s permit came as a blow to environmental advocates working alongside the Band to challenge Line 5. 

Evan Feinauer, an attorney with Clean Wisconsin, said that “despite this ruling, the evidence presented during the hearing remains undeniable: Enbridge’s Line 5 reroute poses significant long-term risks to wetlands, waterways, and treaty-protected resources in northern Wisconsin.” Feinauer said in a statement that “experts testified that the DNR underestimated ecological impacts, relied on an inadequate monitoring plan, and overlooked Enbridge’s troubling history of environmental violations. This decision does not erase those facts.”

John Petroskey, a senior attorney with Earthjustice, also said that the judge’s decision ignored “strong evidence that the DNR broke the law when it approved the Line 5 reroute.” Petroskey added, “Enbridge’s project threatens permanent damage to the Band’s treaty-protected water, plants, and medicines, all for the enrichment of a foreign oil pipeline company. The Band will continue to fight to protect their interests and halt construction.”

Rob Lee, senior staff attorney for Midwest Environmental Advocates, said that while the decision was disappointing, “it does not diminish our resolve or end our responsibility to protect Wisconsin’s waters from the irreversible harm this project threatens to cause.” Lee continued, “the record in this case is clear, and our work is far from over. Based on the significant legal issues presented and the strength of the record, we believe there is a strong basis for appellate review, and we are considering all appropriate next steps.”

Other environmental groups and tribal allies expressed that they remain determined to keep fighting Line 5. “Ultimately, this doesn’t change the fact that Line 5 must be shut down to protect the Great Lakes and our climate,” said Elizabeth Ward, chapter director of the Sierra Club – Wisconsin. Debta Cronmiller, executive director of the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin, said that standing up to Line 5 is in line with the group’s values of protecting sensitive environments, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, advancing renewable energy and supporting tribal rights. 

“Every effort to oppose the construction of new pipeline infrastructure builds power in the broader movement to end our reliance on dirty fossil fuels,” said Emily Park, co-executive director of 350 Wisconsin. “Instead of facilitating more carbon emissions, we should be investing in renewable energy, sustainable transportation, and technologies that will help us transition to a clean energy future.” 

Environmental groups and the Bad River Band are pushing for Line 5 to be shut down, with a court-imposed deadline for their case set in June. The reroute project would involve blasting and horizontal drilling through at least 186 waterways and 101 acres of high-quality wetlands which drain into Lake Superior.

On Friday, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers released the final version of its Environmental Impact Statement on Enbridge’s proposed Line 5 tunnel project, starting a 30 day waiting period before making its final decision on whether to grant the pipeline company a permit to move forward with the proposal.

Canada-based Enbridge celebrated the release of the statement as a true milestone, with spokesperson Ryan Duffy praising the six-year review as “thorough, transparent, and science driven.” However, Line 5 opponents argue the final document fails to address several key concerns, including the project’s impacts on Indigenous treaty rights and alternatives for transporting oil outside of the Great Lakes.

The Line 5 tunnel project would replace the segment of dual pipelines operating in the Straits of Mackinac – where Lake Michigan and Lake Huron meet – with a new, single segment housed in a tunnel in the bedrock beneath the lakes. 

The 645-mile long pipeline runs from Northwestern Wisconsin, through Michigan where it ends in Sarnia, Ontario. It carries up to 22.68 million gallons of crude oil and natural gas liquids through the Straits of Mackinac each day. 

Julie Goodwin, a senior attorney for Earthjustice, which is supporting the Bay Mills Indian Community in its fight against the pipeline, said the final environmental impact statement sets up a predetermined decision to approve the tunnel by failing to consider scenarios where oil is not flowing through the straits.

In its review, the corps looked at four main scenarios: taking no action and allowing the dual pipelines to continue operating, constructing a tunnel beneath the lakebed as Enbridge would prefer, placing a gravel/rock protective cover over the dual pipelines, and replacing the dual pipelines with a new segment installed using horizontal directional drilling under the lakebed.

“The corps had the opportunity, of course, during this environmental review process to look at alternatives that transport oil outside of the Great Lakes region or in different ways. And they just, they never took that opportunity,” Goodwin said.

A 2016 study from the University of Michigan determined more than 700 miles of shoreline in lakes Huron and Michigan would be vulnerable to pollution should Line 5 rupture. A 2018 study published by Michigan State University determined that the economic damage from a Great Lakes oil spill would amount to $5.6 billion dollars.

While the environmental impact statement acknowledges the straits are a profoundly sacred place in the culture, history and spirituality of Anishinaabe Tribal Nations, it does not address the tunnel project’s impact on treaty rights, which grant tribal nations the right to hunt, fish and gather on lands ceded to the federal government. 

The corps writes that its review of treaty rights is separate from its review of the project under the National Environmental Policy Act and that it is consulting on a government-to-government basis with federally recognized Tribes to determine if the tunnel project would infringe upon treaty rights. The final finding will be included in its record of decision.

On March 21, 2025, Bay Mills Indian Community alongside the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi, and Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi sent a letter to the Army of Corps of Engineers withdrawing their participation as cooperating agencies in drafting the environmental impact statement, due to President Donald Trump’s Administration’s plan to expedite review of the tunnel project. 

The Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians similarly withdrew from talks with the corps on March 26.

Whitney Gravelle, president of the Bay Mills Indian Community, said it has been frustrating to watch the corps move forward with the environmental impact statement without completing surveys and research on cultural resources and treaty rights. 

“That’s one of the reasons we left as a cooperating agency,” Gravelle said. “The corps has disregarded tribes. They’ve disregarded tribal treaty rights, they’ve disregarded cultural resources, and it has just been one of the most dehumanizing processes I have ever participated in.”

The tunnel itself will bore through several cultural sites, archaeological resources and what Anishinaabe consider to be the site of creation, Gravelle said and there are hundreds if not thousands of archaeological sites on the north and south ends of the straits.

“Those burial places are how we understand our history, how we understand our culture, how we understand our trade movements, or where we’re meant to be harvesting, hunting and gathering,” Gravelle said. “To then be told that all of these places can be destroyed and that it doesn’t really matter, what you’re really saying is that our Indigenous lifeways then don’t matter.”

Gravelle emphasized that the impacts from the tunnels construction are not abstract or theoretical, telling Michigan Advance that these places are where parents go to teach their children ceremony on the water, uncles teach their families how to hunt and put food on the table and elders share stories so their community can understand who they are as a people. 

“To have those rights limited or overlooked or misunderstood is really undermining the impact that will be felt by generations,” Gravelle said. “Not only by myself, but by my niece, you know, by my children, by the generations that will exist long after I’m gone from this earth.”

In a statement, Sean McBrearty, the campaign coordinator for anti-Line 5 Oil & Water Don’t Mix coalition pointed to several of the environmental impacts included within the assessment. 

“The EIS confirms that the tunnel would result in permanent wetland loss and require excavation and removal of roughly 665,000 cubic yards of bedrock from beneath the Straits of Mackinac, the ecological heart of the Great Lakes system,” McBrearty said. “These impacts are not temporary, and they cannot be undone.”

While much of the focus on Line 5 has centered around the Straits of Mackinac, Gravelle noted that concerns about an oil spill stretch the length of the pipeline, which has leaked more than 30 times over its lifespan, spilling more than 1 million gallons of oil.

However, Gravelle and several other pipeline opponents emphasized that a permitting decision from the Army Corps of Engineers does not give Enbridge a green light to move forward with the project, as the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy has yet to decide on a Clean Water Act permit for the project. The Sierra Club and Oil and Water Don’t Mix have already called on Gov. Gretchen Whitmer to block the project from moving forward. 

“All eyes are really turning to Governor Whitmer,” Goodwin said. “She has two choices to either cave to the Trump administration’s agenda and their friends in the oil industry, or stand up for Michigan and protect the Great Lakes.”

Enbridge pumping station, Mackinaw City, Feb. 7, 2023 | Laina G. Stebbins

A federal judge has deemed Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s move to revoke the Line 5 oil pipeline’s easement to operate within the Great Lakes unenforceable, determining that the move is barred by federal law.

Judge Robert Jonker of the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan’s Southern Division issued an order Wednesday siding with Canadian pipeline company Enbridge in their case against Whitmer and the director of the Department of Natural Resources.

In his opinion, Jonker pointed to the Pipeline Safety Act of 1992, concurring with Enbridge’s assertion that the law preempts states from placing safety regulations on interstate pipelines. He also pointed to arguments from the government of the United States and Canada arguing that the state’s effort to shut down the pipeline violates a 1977 treaty between the two nations concerning the flow of oil and natural gas through pipelines across borders. 

Consequently, Jonker granted Enbridge’s request for summary judgment, barring the state from enforcing the order terminating the pipeline’s easement to operate in the Straits of Mackinac, where Lake Huron and Lake Michigan meet. 

“Pipeline safety generally, and protection of the Straits of Mackinac, are critical interests to be sure,” Jonker wrote in his opinion. “But when it comes to Line 5, they are the responsibility of the United States and Michigan lacks the power to interfere.”

Line 5 has long been a point of concern for tribal nations and environmental advocates within the Great Lakes, as Whitmer and Attorney General Dana Nessel each pledged to shut down the pipeline as part of their 2018 campaign. 

The 645-mile-long pipeline, which runs from northwestern Wisconsin to Sarnia, Ontario includes a four-mile-long segment, where a set of dual pipelines operates on the lakebed of the Straits of Mackinac.

Opponents of the pipeline point to a 2010 incident, where Enbridge’s Line 6B ruptured, spilling hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil into a tributary of the Kalamazoo river. Enbridge has also reported gaps in the protective coating in the segment running through the straits. These segments have also been damaged by anchor strikes, prompting the state to declare the region a “No Anchor” zone.

In a statement to the Michigan Advance on Wednesday, Enbridge Spokesperson Ryan Duffy said the company welcomes the ruling, arguing that state officials pursued a shutdown of the pipeline due to “unsupported” claims about its safety.

“Any dispute over its continued operation must be resolved through the 1977 Transit Treaty’s dispute resolution process, which Canada has already invoked,” Duffy said. “Today’s ruling makes clear that efforts by Michigan officials to permanently shut down Line 5 would interfere with U.S. foreign affairs – authority vested exclusively in the federal government.”

A spokesperson for Whitmer referred Michigan Advance to the Department of Attorney General, which is representing the governor and DNR Director Scott Bowen in the case.

Danny Wimmer, the attorney general’s press secretary, said they are consulting with the governor’s office and the DNR to review the opinion and determine their next steps, which could include an appeal of the ruling. 

“From our own preliminary review, it appears this opinion is wrongly decided on the law and an affront to Michigan’s sovereign interests in managing the use and occupation of its submerged lands,” Wimmer said. 

A separate case led by Nessel which aims to invalidate the pipeline’s easement remains pending in state court.

Attorneys for Whitmer and Bowen have also asked the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh whether the state is immune from legal action in the case, after two previous courts determined the matter fell within exceptions to sovereign immunity.

The Bad River in Mellen, south of the Bad River Band's reservation. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

The Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, challenging the corps’ decision to grant a permit allowing the oil company Enbridge to reroute its Line 5 pipeline around the tribe’s reservation in northern Wisconsin

The lawsuit, filed in the Washington D.C. federal circuit court, is another step in the long legal history of the Enbridge pipeline and the company’s effort to move it from its current route through the tribe’s land. The tribe is asking that the permit approval be vacated. 

In October, the corps approved Enbridge’s permit to reroute the pipeline off the reservation despite significant public opposition. 

The new route moves the pipeline south but it still runs across land on three sides of the reservation and crosses the Bad River upstream of the reservation. The permit was approved as the administration of President Donald Trump has moved to more aggressively support oil and natural gas projects. Earlier in the year, the corps approved a fast-tracked permitting process for Enbridge to construct a tunnel across the Straits of Mackinac so Line 5 can cross from Michigan’s Upper Peninsula to its Lower Peninsula. 

The tribe’s lawsuit alleges that the corps violated the National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Water Act and the Administrative Procedure Act by not properly conducting required environmental reviews or following the proper procedures. 

“For hundreds of years, and to this day, the Band’s ancestors and members have lived, hunted, fished, trapped, gathered, and engaged in traditional activities in the wetlands and waters to be crossed by the Project,” the lawsuit states. “The Project would encircle the Reservation on three sides and damage areas the Band highly values for their ecological and cultural significance. The Corps’ failure to properly review and address the Project’s environmental impacts to wetlands and waterways harms the Band’s interest in maintaining its Reservation homeland and resources in the ceded territory.”

The lawsuit alleges that the corps violated the NEPA by not giving proper consideration to the “environmental effects of construction, maintenance, and operation of the Project,” including how it will harm the health of resources on and near the reservation. 

Under the Clean Water Act, the corps cannot approve permits until the state or tribal government responsible for water quality in the project area certifies the project won’t harm the local water. While the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources did previously approve the state permits for the Line 5 reroute, those permits are currently being challenged in a separate legal process. 

The tribe alleges in the lawsuit that the corps should not have moved forward with its permits until after the state process is complete.  

[The corps] violated the Clean Water Act by issuing the Permit without ensuring that construction and maintenance of the Project would not adversely affect Wisconsin and the Band’s water quality,” the lawsuit states. “This includes issuing a … permit while the required … state water quality certification is not yet final, pending state administrative proceedings; without addressing the inadequacies the Band identified with Wisconsin’s Water Quality Certification; or ensuring compliance with the Band’s water quality standards.” 

The lawsuit also states the permit approval does not address how the project construction will affect the tribe’s “ability to exercise treaty-protected rights to hunt, fish, trap, and gather in ceded territory,” “failed to evaluate the risks and impacts of oil spills along the pipeline route” and “failed to evaluate the risks and impacts of blasting as a construction method.” 

In a statement, tribe chairwoman Elizabeth Arbuckle said the tribe would do whatever it can to protect the health of the Bad River, Lake Superior and surrounding watersheds. 

“For more than a decade, we have had to endure the unlawful trespass of a dangerous oil pipeline on our lands and waters,” Arbuckle said. “The reroute only makes matters worse. Enbridge’s history is full of accidents and oil spills. If that happens here, our Tribe and other communities in the Northwoods will suffer unacceptable consequences. From the Bad River to Lake Superior, our waters are the lifeblood of our Reservation. They have fed and nurtured our Tribe for hundreds of years. We will do everything in our power to protect them.”

Enbridge spokesperson Juli Kellner said in an email that while the Army Corps made an initial permit decision, it has not been signed by the corps or the company and therefore isn’t a final decision that can be challenged in court. She said the company would intervene in the lawsuit to defend the permit approval. 

“Enbridge submitted permit applications to state and federal regulators in early 2020 to build a new segment of pipeline around the Bad River Reservation,” she said. “Enbridge’s permit applications are supported by thorough and extensive environmental analysis and modeling by leading third-party experts confirming project construction impacts will be temporary and isolated, with no adverse effect to water quality or wetlands.”