Connect with us

Wisconsin

DOJ weighs in on Line 5 trespass on tribal land in Wisconsin

Published

on

DOJ weighs in on Line 5 trespass on tribal land in Wisconsin



Federal government finds trespass is illegal, makes no move to remove pipeline

UPPER PENINSULA — The Enbridge Line 5 pipeline has been found to be illegally trespassing on tribal land in Wisconsin, but will not be moved any time soon.

After years of court arguments, lawsuits and delays, the federal government announced this week that Enbridge is in fact trespassing on land owned by the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, but made no move to force the pipeline off the land.

Tribal groups in the Great Lakes region expressed relief that Enbridge’s trespassing is being viewed as a crime after more than 10 years, but are still angry that no move is being made to remove the pipeline.

Advertisement

The Department of Justice announcement urged the courts to penalize Enbridge for its continued trespassing but also suggested the courts could allow Enbridge to continue trespassing illegally.

“Today, the United States agreed that Enbridge’s ongoing occupation of our land is illegal. We are grateful the U.S. urged the court not to let Enbridge profit from its unlawful trespass,” said Bad River Band Chairman Robert Blanchard in a statement. “But we are disappointed that the U.S. has not unequivocally called for an immediate end to Enbridge’s ongoing trespass, as justice and the law demand. Enbridge should be required to promptly leave our reservation, just like other companies that have trespassed on tribal land. We are hopeful that the appeals court will put an end to Enbridge’s shameful decade of trespass and not condone its exploitation of our land and sovereign rights.”

Built in 1953, Enbridge Energy’s Line 5 spans 645 miles from Superior, Wisconsin to Sarnia, Ontario. The line transports light crude oil and natural gas liquids. Four miles of the pipeline — consisting of two, 20-inch pipelines — crosses through the Straits of Mackinac. 

Line 5’s continued presence in the Straits of Mackinac has sparked serious concern from environmental groups and other advocates about the devastating risk of rupture. On the other side, proponents of the pipeline point to the economic impact and need for fuel transportation.

Advertisement

More: As legal sparring continues, Army Corps pushes Line 5 permit timeline to 2025

All 12 of Michigan’s federally recognized tribes, as well as tribes in Wisconsin, Minnesota and Canada, have passed resolutions calling for the decommissioning of Line 5.

While tribal communities express concerns about a possible oil spill and potential ecological harm, the Great Lakes are also significant in the creation stories of the Anishinaabe tribes.

On March 21, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel delivered oral arguments at the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in an attempt to bring the Line 5 decommission lawsuit back to the state of Michigan.

Advertisement

The Nessel vs. Enbridge lawsuit was originally filed in 2019 in Michigan, arguing that the 1836 Treaty of Washington guarantees these tribes the right to maintain their way of life in the ceded territory — a right, they claim, that will be destroyed if an oil spill from the pipeline contaminates the waters.

“We expect a fair trial that upholds the promises the United States government made to our ancestors,” said Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Chairman Austin Lowes. “We are going to present the facts behind our case and will never stop standing up for our rights as Indigenous people and the sovereignty of our nation.”

Enbridge has successfully delayed the case multiple times and had it removed from state to federal court.

“If the United States supports Enbridge, it would destroy not only both tribal sovereignty but also state sovereignty with respect to the ability to manage land, resources and water for their citizens,” said Bay Mills Indian Community President Whitney Gravelle.

Lowes added that “Our treaty with the United States government predates any treaty that Enbridge is using in an attempt to justify its illegal pipeline operations.”

Advertisement

“Our case isn’t just about whether Enbridge can continue operating Line 5, but it could impact every federally recognized tribe’s right to control what happens on their land,” he said.

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals requested federal input in December 2023. After this, in early March, leaders of 30 Tribal Nations in the Great Lakes region sent a letter to President Joe Biden urging the United States to take action against Line 5’s trespass on the Bad River Band’s sovereign territories.

The Biden Administration has not responded to either request.

Subscribe: Get unlimited access to our coverage

Advertisement

More than 60 Tribal Nations supported Nessel in a motion to bring the case back to state court. The arguments for keeping the case in federal court or moving it back to state court were heard during the March 21 hearings at the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Cincinnati.

Nessel maintains that this case belongs in state court based on Michigan’s sovereign responsibility to protect the public trust in the waters of the Great Lakes. She argued to the court that taking the case out of state court because Enbridge prefers a federal forum violates Michigan’s right to have state claims resolved in state court.

“The case law regarding a Tribal Nation’s sovereign right to maintain their homelands and thus their reservations is a core aspect of tribal sovereignty and any position to the contrary would be unexpected and shocking,” said Gravelle.

Assistant Attorney General Dan Bock argued to the Sixth Circuit that by waiting more than two years to move the case to federal court, Enbridge’s removal was untimely and must be rejected. Bock also argued that, timing issues aside, the federal court misapplied the law when it ruled that the case belongs in federal court rather than state court.

Advertisement

Enbridge’s attorney Alice Loughran argued that the removal to federal court was timely, and it should remain in federal court because federal issues dominate the case. Those issues include the impact of the 1977 U.S.-Canada transnational pipelines treaty, the federal Submerged Lands Act and the extensive federal regulation of oil pipelines.

Enbridge argued that the state’s rights to protect the waters of the Great Lakes and the company’s right to protect commerce profits are federal issues.

The arguments were presented to a three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeal: Judges Richard Griffin, Amul Thapar and John Nalbandian.

On April 9, the Department of Justice weighed in on the appeal and came to a final decision that Enbridge is illegally trespassing. Though it acknowledges the trespassing, it does not call for immediate removal and even suggested the courts could allow the trespassing to continue indefinitely.

Many tribal groups spoke out about the dangers of such a decision, as it continues to threaten both environmental safety in the area and tribal sovereignty.

Advertisement

“The filing leaves more questions than answers. It also leaves Bad River, other Tribal Nations throughout the region, and the 40 million people that rely on the Great Lakes at risk of a catastrophic spill. We fear it will take Line 5 failing again, and the disaster of an oil spill for our position to be taken seriously. This isn’t just about tribes, it is about clean water, it is about life. It is about every U.S. citizen and preserving our natural resources for generations to come,” said Gravelle.

Requests for comment from Enbridge were not returned.

— Contact Brendan Wiesner: BWiesner@Sooeveningnews.com



Source link

Advertisement

Wisconsin

Badgers football losses go beyond field and into Wisconsin’s economy, UW report says

Published

on

Badgers football losses go beyond field and into Wisconsin’s economy, UW report says



Ripple effects could be felt in other UW athletic programs

The 2025 Badger football season is one fans already want to forget − but the negative economic impact could be felt well beyond the final game on Nov. 29.

If the team’s poor performance continues, it could reduce the program’s profit by $20 million annually, according to a new report from the Center for Research on the Wisconsin Economy, housed at University of Wisconsin-Madison

Advertisement

The ripple effects can be felt in other university athletic programs subsidized by the football program, and could impact student applications to the university, alumni donations, and research output, according to the report − titled “The Economic Impact of Badger Football’s Declining Performance.”

Beyond the financial blow to the campus, the report estimates the city of Madison could could lose up to $160 million, and the state could lose up to $280 million “stemming from reduced attendance, game day spending, tourism and reputational value.”  

The UW Athletic Department disputes the findings of the report.  

“Wisconsin Athletics respects the work and research of our world-renowned academic partners, along with their passion for the sports that represent our institution,” a department statement said.

“Although we do not believe that this study portrays a complete and accurate representation of the economic factors around the football program, we all share a common interest in its successful future.

Advertisement

“We welcome the opportunity to collaborate with the Center for Research on the Wisconsin Economy on any future works on this topic,” according to the statement.

Badger football is profitable 

In 2023, the football team had revenue of $106. 7 million and expenses of $42.3 million, with the program earning more than $64 million, according to the U.S. Department of Education’s Equity in Athletics Data Analysis cited in the report.  

In 2024, Badger football had $107.4 million in revenue according to its NCAA membership filing, and had expenses of $49.6 million − posting a profit of $57.8 million. The Badgers men’s basketball program earned a $7.3 million profit that year.

If the winning percentage falls from nearly 80%, as it was during the 2017 to 2019 seasons, to 50%, that could mean “Badger Football’s annual profit could drop by about $20 million,” the report reads. 

Advertisement

The team this season so far has a 2-6 record with four games remaining in November.

Is it Luke Fickell’s fault? 

Short answer: not in the beginning.  

The report says the program’s profit didn’t decline during 2022 and 2023 despite the 14-12 regular season record. That was during Luke Fickell’s first two seasons as head coach.

“This is probably because there was a lot of excitement” about Fickell’s hiring, the report states.  

Advertisement

Fans recently have been chanting “fire Fickell” at home games. Wisconsin Athletic Director Chris McIntosh addressed fans concerns in an Oct. 20 letter.

It said the football season has “fallen well short of our standards” and added the department is committed “to elevating the investment into our football program to position us to compete at the highest level.” 

Financial impact is already being felt 

 This year the program is on pace to have the lowest attendance in more than 30 years with a 51,980 average scanned attendance during the first four home games. That’s according to data obtained via an open records request and analyzed by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.  

But fans have been signaling their disappointment before this season.  

According to the research center report, “Badgers sold 38,082 season tickets for general seating areas in 2025, down from 42,197 in 2024 and 41,206 in 2023.” 

Advertisement

Football helps subsidize other programs, generates donations 

The Athletic Department’s total profit was less than $11 million in 2023, including the football program’s $64 million profit.

“This suggests that the department’s other programs and operations are subsidized heavily by the football team,” the report states.  

The report cites research that shows “when a male graduate former team wins its conference championship, his donations for general purposes increase by about 7% and his donations to the athletic program increase by about the same percentage.

“Moreover, if a male alumnus’s team won its conference championship during his senior year, his subsequent giving to the athletic program is about 8% a year higher.” 

Advertisement

The Badgers last won the Big Ten football title in 2012.

“If the poor performance continues, its impact on alumni donations and engagement is likely to diminish,” the report reads.

Local economic impact of athletic program 

College sports programs affect communities and states as fans go to games, restaurants, and bars, buy merchandise, and pay for hotel rooms.  

The report compared the UW athletic program’s impact on Madison and Wisconsin with the University of MinnesotaTwin Cities program on Minneapolis area and Minnesota. Both football teams had similar performances in 2022 and 2023.  

It showed the Badgers’ impact on Madison contributed to 3,360 jobs and $462 million of economic output.

Advertisement

The Gophers’ impact on the Twin Cities contributed to 1,152 jobs and $298 million of economic output.  

Statewide, the Badger athletic program contributed to 5,640 jobs and $757 million of economic impact in Wisconsin. In Minnesota, the Gophers contributed to $474 million of economic impact. 

The report says the Twin Cities population is larger than Madison’s population − making the latter “likely more sensitive to Badger Football’s performance.”  

NIL and program investment 

UW can revitalize the program by investing in facilities, recruiting budgets, NIL (name, image and likeness) deals for athletes, and competitive compensation for players and coaches, the report said.

The report estimates the Badgers NIL collective funding in 2023 and 2024 was $8.9 million. The highest spent in the conference was Ohio State at $20.2 million, it said.

Advertisement

NIL deals aren’t public information and the estimate is based on methodology from nil-ncaa.com/big10. .

Spending more money on the football program “could help reverse the team’s declining performance,” the report said.

“Enhanced facilities can attract top transfers and recruits, while better coaching and talent ensure the return on these assets are maximized,” it said. “Strategic, dual-focused investments are essential to rebuild competitiveness and mitigate the economic risks estimated above.” 

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporter John Steppe contributed to this report.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Wisconsin

Three former Wisconsin Badgers make Utah Jazz G League training camp roster

Published

on

Three former Wisconsin Badgers make Utah Jazz G League training camp roster


Recent Wisconsin basketball graduates John Tonje, Steven Crowl and Max Klesmit officially made the Salt Lake City Stars’ training camp roster on Monday. The Stars, the G League affiliate of the Utah Jazz, began their training camp on Monday. Their first game of the 2025-26 season is scheduled for Tuesday, Nov. 11.

Tonje’s inclusion on the roster is no surprise. Following an All-American 2024-25 season leading the Badgers, the Jazz selected him with the No. 53 overall pick in the 2025 NBA draft. He then officially signed a two-way deal with the organization in late August. He’s one of three two-way players on the Stars’ roster, along with Elijah Harkless and Oscar Tshiebwe.

Crowl, meanwhile, converted a Summer League roster spot into this training camp invitation. He should have an inside track at G League action, given his fast-growing experience within the organization.

Finally, this opportunity is Max Klesmit’s first at the NBA or G League level. He’ll likely need strong play throughout training camp to earn a spot on the team’s regular-season roster.

Advertisement

Contact/Follow @TheBadgersWire on X (formerly Twitter) and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Wisconsin Badgers news, notes and opinion





Source link

Continue Reading

Wisconsin

Wisconsin will join lawsuit against USDA to force release of FoodShare funds, Evers says

Published

on

Wisconsin will join lawsuit against USDA to force release of FoodShare funds, Evers says


play

  • Wisconsin is joining a multi-state lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture over FoodShare funding.
  • The lawsuit aims to force the release of contingency funds before benefits run out on November 1 due to a federal government shutdown.
  • The USDA recently changed its guidance, stating contingency funds cannot be used for benefit payments.
  • Wisconsin’s state legislature is unlikely to provide state funding to continue the program.

Wisconsin will join a multi-state lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture to force the release of contingency funding for FoodShare before benefits run dry for thousands of Wisconsin residents on Nov. 1.

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers made the announcement Oct. 27 at a roundtable event at the Milwaukee Public Library’s Martin Luther King Branch, where community advocates warned looming cuts to government programs would impact their businesses.

Advertisement

“The good news is, the federal government can (release the FoodShare money),” Evers told reporters. “They can do it; there’s nothing stopping them from doing it. In fact, we’re going to be suing them for not using the funds that they have.”

The forthcoming lawsuit will argue that both USDA and the Office of Management and Budget have previously and recently said that SNAP benefits are an obligation of the United States.

Before Friday, the USDA advised $3 billion worth of contingency funding could be used for administrative costs and benefit payments in the event of a shutdown. But on Oct. 24, the agency issued a new memo saying funding cannot legally be used for such purposes.

The lawsuit is scheduled to be filed just a few days before federal funding for the FoodShare program will evaporate because of the federal government shutdown.

Advertisement

At that point, FoodShare enrollees may use leftover benefits during the month of November but will not receive any new benefits until the government reopens.

Wisconsin and the other states suing the federal government together provide more than 21 million individuals with food assistance, according to Evers’ office.

State lawmakers could create a new state-funded appropriation to keep the program alive as the shutdown continues, but Senate President Mary Felzkowski said this week the Legislature is unlikely to do that, calling the matter a federal issue.

Advertisement

Evers cannot act alone by issuing an executive order to continue the program, his office said, because the state Legislature has the power to appropriate money.

In September, about $116 million in benefits were issued to FoodShare recipients, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending