Line 5

Opponents said they're worried about potentially unsafe conditions, like weak bedrock, high water pressure and dangerous gases beneath the Straits.

The Supreme Court’s decision allows Enbridge to sue Michigan for attempting to use its regulatory power to scuttle Line 5 and stop a tunnel project under the straits.

In separate cases heard in back-to-back hearings by the Supreme Court, the plaintiffs argued the state has never fully analyzed the risks posed by a more than 70-year-old section of pipeline located in the Straits of Mackinac.

After years of legal wrangling, energy company Enbridge has finally started rerouting an aging oil pipeline around a tribal reservation in northern Wisconsin.

The Michigan attorney general and Enbridge Energy have agreed to put challenges in state courts on hold while it argues critical legal questions in federal courts.

Michigan officials have been trying for years to shut down Enbridge's Line 5 over claims that it is unsafe and liable to spill petroleum products into the Great Lakes

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in February on a key question that could decide whether state or federal courts will determine the fate of Enbridge Energy’s controversial Line 5.

Enbridge sought to stop the state from trying any further to shut down the pipeline, which in Wisconsin, runs through the Upper Peninsula, the Straits of Mackinac, and Lower Peninsula, before ending in Ontario, Canada.

Public comments are due by the end of the week after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed a tunnel alternative last month.

Those for and those against constructing a tunnel under the Straits of Mackinac are making their cases. A comment period for the necessary permits from the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy ends this Friday.