October 2, 2026.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has declined to rehear Enbridge Energy's challenge to a ruling that found the company is trespassing on certain lands within the Bad River Reservation in northern Wisconsin.
The October 1, 2026, decision leaves in place the court's July 30 ruling that Enbridge does not have a legal right to operate Line 5 across 12 allotted parcels of reservation land where the company's rights-of-way expired in 2013. The appellate court also determined that Enbridge must ultimately remove the pipeline from those parcels sending the specific remedies back to the federal district court for further proceedings.
The case involves the Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians and Enbridge's Line 5 pipeline, which carries oil and natural gas liquids between the United States and Canada.
Court leaves trespass finding intact.
The Seventh Circuit's July decision affirmed the district court's determination that Enbridge is trespassing on the affected parcels.
The appeals court found that the rights-of-way across the 12 allotted parcels expired in 2013 and that Enbridge does not have a legal right to continue operating the pipeline across those parcels. The court affirmed the Band's victory on its trespass and unjust-enrichment claims and also affirmed that restitution and a permanent injunction are available remedies for the trespass.
The court's ruling concerns approximately 12 miles of Line 5 that runs through the Bad River Reservation, but the specific trespass finding involves 12 allotted parcels. The appellate opinion distinguishes those parcels from the broader portion of the pipeline's route through the reservation.
$5.15 million restitution award must be recalculated.
The original federal district court awarded the Bad River Band $5,151,668 in restitution in June 2023 for past trespass and unjust enrichment.
The district court also ordered Enbridge to continue making payments based on a portion of its profits for as long as Line 5 continued operating over the affected parcels.
The Seventh Circuit did not eliminate restitution as a remedy. Instead, it vacated the specific $5,151,668 award and sent the issue back to the district court for recalculation.
The appellate court concluded that the district court's calculation improperly relied on overlapping measures of Enbridge's economic benefit, creating a risk of double counting. The lower court must now determine an appropriate restitution amount consistent with the Seventh Circuit's decision.
Removal remains required.
The Seventh Circuit also vacated the district court's original timetable requiring Enbridge to cease operating Line 5 across the affected parcels by June 16, 2026.
That deadline had already been stayed by the district court while the appeal was pending. The appeals court directed the district court to refashion the injunction and provide Enbridge with a reasonable opportunity to complete the planned rerouting of Line 5 around the Bad River Reservation.
The appellate court nevertheless made clear that the pipeline must be removed from the affected parcels.
The court instructed the district court to establish an appropriate timetable and enforcement measures rather than simply reinstating the original three-year deadline. The court emphasized the need to balance the Band's property rights with broader interests surrounding Line 5, including the pipeline's role in transporting energy between the United States and Canada.
Enbridge's proposed reroute.
Enbridge has been pursuing a project to relocate Line 5 around the Bad River Reservation.
According to Enbridge, the proposed relocation would involve approximately 41 miles of new pipeline around the reservation. The company has said the project is intended to address the dispute over the existing route while allowing Line 5 to continue operating.
The relocation project requires state and federal permits and has been under development for several years. The Seventh Circuit recognized the reroute as part of the circumstances the district court should consider when establishing the timetable for removing Line 5 from the affected parcels.
Court rejects separate nuisance claim.
The Seventh Circuit's July decision also changed part of the district court's ruling concerning pipeline safety.
The district court had found that Enbridge's continued operation of Line 5 near a portion of the Bad River known as the "meander" constituted a public nuisance. The Seventh Circuit reversed that determination, concluding that federal pipeline-safety law displaced the Band's federal common-law nuisance claim.
That ruling is separate from the trespass claim. The Seventh Circuit affirmed the trespass finding while reversing the public-nuisance judgment.
What happens next.
With the request for rehearing rejected, the July 30 appellate decision remains controlling in the case.
The federal district court in Wisconsin must now address the remedies left open by the Seventh Circuit, including the amount of restitution owed for the past trespass and the timetable and conditions for removing Line 5 from the affected allotted parcels.
The litigation has also involved the governments of the United States and Canada because of the international role of Line 5 and the 1977 Transit Pipelines Treaty between the two countries. The Seventh Circuit considered those broader interests when determining how the district court should structure the remedy.
The October 1 rehearing decision does not itself establish a new restitution amount or a new removal deadline. Those issues remain for the federal district court to address under the directions provided by the Seventh Circuit.
