Tag: Flow v. MPSC

Gov. Whitmer to Enbridge: The tunnel game is up; it’s time for a new solution

Published on September 9th, 2026 by - Blog Posts, Reports & Media Releases

September 9, 2026

Traverse City, Mich. — Today, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer and her administration issued a consequential new statement on Enbridge’s proposed Line 5 pipeline tunnel through the Straits of Mackinac, telling the Canadian company that it’s time to pull back from its tunnel plan that will put the Great Lakes at risk for another decade. The governor called on Enbridge to expedite an alternative to the tunnel and the existing pipelines, and get its oil out of our Great Lakes.

The call for Enbridge to pack its bags comes in the wake of the recent Michigan Supreme Court ruling remanding the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) permit for the tunnel, and requiring that all state agencies conduct comprehensive analyses of environmental impacts and alternatives in permitting decisions. It also comes just days after a Line 5 leak in Wisconsin released 1.3 million gallons of natural gas liquids — the largest spill in Wisconsin’s history.

Gov. Whitmer stated that the Court’s 6-1 decision in FLOW v. MPSC — and the concurrent case brought by Little Traverse Bay Band of Odawa Indians, Bay Mills Indian Community, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, and Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi, the Environmental Law and Policy Center, and Michigan Climate Action Network — fundamentally changes the landscape and the standard by which the tunnel permits issued by EGLE will be evaluated.

The Court found that the MPSC failed to properly weigh the Great Lakes’ public trust protections, potential environmental impacts, and alternatives before approving the Enbridge Line 5 tunnel. Given that the EGLE permits are likely to be challenged on the same legal basis, Gov. Whitmer acknowledged that the Court decision will effectively push the timeline for the tunnel back for years, possibly a decade or more. Meanwhile, Line 5 as it sits today remains a very real danger and threat to the Great Lakes — described by Gov. Whitmer as a “ticking time bomb” — and the communities and economies that rely on them.

Notably, in her letter to Enbridge, the Governor boldly reasserted her responsibility as a public trustee to protect the Great Lakes, stating that “The bottomlands belong to the people of Michigan” and pointed out Enbridge’s absurd assertion that “Michigan, having once said yes to these pipelines in 1953, is forever bound to that decision with no further say.” Gov. Whitmer also called out Enbridge’s familiar, disastrous track record in Michigan, citing the catastrophic 2010 oil spill in the Kalamazoo River — which stands as one of the largest inland spills in U.S. history. “One spill in the Straits could do irreparable damage to our water, our economy, and our way of life.”

“We Michiganders are united by the Great Lakes and we are united in defending them against a Canadian oil corporation in our lakes. Every hour, Line 5 pumps almost a million gallons of oil through the open waters of the Great Lakes. As the Governor made clear, the status quo is unacceptable,” said Liz Kirkwood, Executive Director of Flow Water Advocates. “Enbridge’s false tunnel solution is a profitable delay tactic that keeps oil flowing through the existing pipelines and threatens our Great Lakes. It’s high time for our communities to demand real alternatives that promote energy security and market stability, and protect our Great Lakes from a catastrophic oil spill.”

Flow Water Advocates has long advocated for safer alternatives to deliver Line 5’s cargo — the majority of which is delivered to refineries and petrochemical plants in Sarnia, Ontario. As Gov. Whitmer succinctly stated in her letter to Enbridge, “[T]here is an alternative. The choice is not simply between the existing pipelines and a tunnel…That alternative may not preserve Enbridge’s current market share or be as profitable for your shareholders. But those are not reasons to expose the Great Lakes to another decade of unthinkable risk.”

###

Flow Water Advocates is an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit based in Traverse City, Michigan, dedicated to ensuring the waters of the Great Lakes Basin are healthy, public, and protected for all. Our team of legal and policy experts helps communities, businesses, and governments make informed decisions that safeguard public trust rights to water. Learn more at FlowWaterAdvocates.org.

Flow v. MPSC: MI Supreme Court issues Line 5 tunnel permit decision

Published on July 31st, 2026 by - Blog Posts, Reports & Media Releases

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 31, 2026

Michigan Supreme Court upholds the public’s rights to the Great Lakes, orders new review of Line 5 tunnel. 

Traverse City, Mich., July 31, 2026 — The Michigan Supreme Court ruled that Michigan regulators failed to properly weigh the Great Lakes’ public trust protections and environmental impacts before approving Enbridge Energy’s proposed Line 5 tunnel beneath the Straits of Mackinac. The Court overturned the Michigan Public Service Commission’s (“MPSC”) approval of the project and sent the case back to the agency for further review of public trust and environmental impacts — a major victory for Flow Water Advocates (“Flow”) and its Tribal and environmental co-appellants.

The ruling resolved the consolidated appeals brought by Flow, four federally recognized Tribes – the Little Traverse Bay Band of Odawa Indians, Bay Mills Indian Community, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, and Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi – and the Environmental Law and Policy Center and the Michigan Climate Action Network, all of whom challenged the MPSC’s approval of the tunnel.

The High Court found that the Court of Appeals erred in this case “by applying a deferential standard of review to the MPSC’s decision, and the MPSC erred by (1) failing to consider whether the tunnel project will factually and proximately cause the extension of Line 5’s operational life, potentially resulting in additional environmental harm; (2) comparing alternatives in an inconsistent manner; and (3) failing to consider the project’s impact on public trust resources.” The Court rejected the Court of Appeals’ ruling that the MPSC lacked the authority to apply a common-law public trust analysis, stating, “We agree with FLOW and hold that MEPA requires separate consideration of harms to public trust resources.”

Lead attorney, Riyaz Kanji, remarked, “Today the Michigan Supreme Court vindicated the rights of every Michigander to the protection of the Great Lakes. It reaffirmed that the invaluable waters of the Great Lakes and submerged lands beneath them are held by the state for the benefit of the people, and that the public’s rights in those vital waters and lands cannot be given away to private interests like Enbridge without careful consideration of the environmental impacts and alternatives. The High Court made clear that regulators and state agencies, like the MPSC, which has authority over the location and operation of pipelines and other utilities, cannot avoid this fundamental duty to the public in their permit decisions.” 

Flow’s Executive Director, Liz Kirkwood, said, “This decision of the Michigan Supreme Court builds on a long lineage of public trust case law and affirms that the public trust doctrine and the Michigan Environmental Protection Act (“MEPA”) are alive and well in Michigan. Today’s historic ruling cements the importance of the MEPA and the common-law public trust doctrine in agency permitting decisions affecting the waters and natural resources of the people of Michigan. The MPSC cannot greenlight the tunnel project until the agency actually determines its impact on the public’s rights to the Great Lakes waters and the lands beneath them — and weighs that harm against the alternatives, as the law requires.”

Flow is represented in this case by its legal team and co-counsel, Kanji & Katzen, P.L.L.C. and Olson & Howard, P.C.