Great Lakes Wire

Today, the Department of Attorney General presented oral arguments before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, Ohio. The case in question, Nessel v. Enbridge, concerns whether litigation should proceed in a Michigan state court or remain in federal court. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel is advocating for the case to return to state court.

"We are here today for the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to hear arguments on whether to send this case back to state court where it belongs or keep it in federal court where Enbridge wants it," said Nessel. She emphasized her commitment as Michigan's Attorney General to protect the Great Lakes from pollution threats posed by profit-driven entities. "Ultimately, this is a Michigan case brought under Michigan law by Michigan’s chief law enforcement officer on behalf of the People of the State to protect our Great Lakes. It belongs in a Michigan court."

Nessel highlighted that enforcing environmental protections is a responsibility of the state government and insisted that state law must be enforced within state courts. Her lawsuit against Canadian oil company Enbridge Energy was initially filed in 2019 at a state level. Both parties litigated there for over a year until Enbridge moved the case to federal court past its deadline.

"The pipeline is now over 70 years old, and Enbridge has a long history of illegal and unintended releases from its oil pipelines," stated Nessel, citing past incidents including Line 5 issues and Line 6B's significant spill in 2010.

Despite substantial proceedings already occurring at the state level, a federal trial court denied Nessel's request for remand back to state jurisdiction. In response, she appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals for an early review rather than waiting for complete litigation at the federal level.

The appeal questions if Enbridge's transfer was timely and appropriate—a matter which both Nessel and some aspects of federal judicial opinion find debatable.