Enbridge Energy, LP v. Nessel

On April 22, 2026, the Michigan Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in Enbridge Energy, LP v. Nessel. The case originated from Enbridge's effort to block Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel from revoking a 1953 easement that allows the Line 5 dual pipelines to transport crude oil and natural gas liquids across the Straits of Mackinac. Enbridge argued that federal pipeline safety laws preempted state action and that the easement constituted an irrevocable contract. The State defended its authority under the public trust doctrine, citing the catastrophic risk of a rupture in the Great Lakes. The Court held that the revocation was a valid exercise of Michigan’s proprietary and sovereign rights, not preempted by federal law, and that Enbridge had failed to demonstrate the easement was perpetual. The decision mandated the shutdown of Line 5 within two years and imposed substantial environmental restoration obligations.

The Michigan Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's decision, upholding the state's termination of the easement. The court ordered Enbridge to cease operations and transfer Line 5's functions to alternative routes, while rejecting Enbridge's takings claim but awarding partial compensation for stranded asset costs.

Whether federal law preempts a state's revocation of a lakebed easement for a cross-border pipeline; whether the 1953 easement is irrevocable; and whether the state's action constitutes a compensable taking under the Fifth Amendment.

The decision intensified national debate over aging energy infrastructure and states' rights to protect the Great Lakes. It emboldened tribal nations and environmental groups in similar challenges, caused a temporary spike in Midwest propane and crude oil prices, and accelerated Enbridge's construction of the Line 5 tunnel bypass. The ruling also set a precedent for state-driven pipeline decommissioning under public trust principles.