By TODD RICHMOND

The Trump administration is stepping into the legal fight over whether Enbridge can continue to operate an aging pipeline beneath a Great Lakes channel, arguing that Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer interfered with U.S. foreign policy when she revoked the line’s easement almost five years ago.

Related Articles

Missouri judge strikes down ballot summary for anti-abortion measure backed by Republican lawmakers

Judge blocks USDA from collecting data about SNAP applicants in 21 states

Trump to sign proclamation imposing $100K fee for H-1B visa applications, White House official says

Trump appointee George Cook takes interim lead at Census Bureau amid new census push

Trump administration asks Supreme Court to strip legal protections from Venezuelan migrants

The pipeline, known as Line 5, has moved crude oil between Superior, Wisconsin, and Sarnia, Ontario, since 1953. A 4.5-mile (6.4-kilometer) segment of the line runs under the Straits of Mackinac, a channel that links Lake Michigan and Lake Huron.

Concerns about the line rupturing and causing a catastrophic spill in the environmentally sensitive area have been growing since 2017, when Enbridge revealed its engineers had known about gaps in its protective coating since 2014. A boat anchor damaged the segment a year later, further stoking fears of a spill.

Whitmer, a Democrat and possible 2028 presidential contender, ordered her regulators in November 2020 to revoke the easement allowing the segment to operate beneath the straits. Enbridge filed a federal lawsuit that same year seeking to invalidate the order. The pipeline has continued to operate as the litigation drags on.

Trump attorneys say Michigan interfering with foreign policy, 1977 treaty

The Trump administration isn’t a party in the case. But U.S. Justice Department attorneys filed a brief on Sept. 12 arguing that Whitmer’s order amounted to an attempt to “globalize” Michigan’s regulatory authority and clash with the federal government’s goal of maintaining the flow of energy between the U.S. and Canada.

They also contend that the revocation clashes with executive orders President Donald Trump issued this year declaring that an abundant, reliable energy supply is key to protecting national security.

“Shutting down Line 5 could disrupt the energy supply chain, increase domestic prices, and enhance the economic and political power and leverage of malign foreign actors worldwide,” the attorneys wrote. “Such outcomes conflict with our nation’s foreign policy goals.”

They argue, too, that only the federal government can regulate pipeline safety and allowing states to enter that arena would lead to a untenable patchwork of regulations. A 1977 treaty between the U.S. and Canada prohibits authorities from impeding the flow of energy through pipelines running between the two counties, they add.

Whitmer’s attorneys say the state has authority to revoke the easement under the public trust doctrine, the legal principle that natural resources belong to the public and the state therefore has a duty to protect them.

Danny Wimmer, a spokesperson for Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, who is defending the revocation, said in an email Friday that Nessel plans to file a response in October. He pointed to earlier filings in which she argues that revoking the easement doesn’t impose or continue any safety regulations and is actually a pipeline routing decision within the state’s authority. The filings also contend that private parties such as Enbridge can’t bring a federal lawsuit to enforce the treaty with Canada.

The Trump administration’s arguments largely mirror those of Enbridge. Asked for comment on the administration’s filing, company spokesperson Michael Barnes in an email Friday pointed again to treaty provisions that he said prevent states and judges from unilaterally shutting down the pipeline.

U.S. District Judge Robert Jonker has scheduled a hearing on a Enbridge motion for summary judgment on Nov. 12.

Trump’s decision to take a stance in the case is a setback for Whitmer as she tries to protect her state’s interests without incurring the president’s wrath. She has stepped lightly around Trump, convincing him to meet with her three times since January. In April, Trump called her a “very good person.”

Enbridge says tunnel would protect Line 5

Enbridge has proposed encasing the straits segment in a protective concrete tunnel, at an estimated cost of at least $500 million. Construction would destroy wetlands and bat habitat but the tunnel would eliminate the chance of another anchor rupturing the line, according to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Michigan regulators approved permits for the tunnel in December 2023. Enbridge needs only Army Corps’ approval before construction can begin. The Corps fast-tracked the permit in April after the Trump administration identified the tunnel for expedited emergency permitting.

Environmental groups and Native American tribes have sued the Michigan Public Service Commission, arguing the panel didn’t consider the overall need for the pipeline when weighing whether to grant the tunnel permits. The Michigan Supreme Court announced Friday that it would hear the case.

More legal sparring

Nessel filed her own lawsuit seeking to void the straits easement in 2019. The U.S. Supreme Court is weighing whether the case belongs in federal or state court.

The pipeline is at the center of a yet another legal dispute, this time in Wisconsin. A federal judge in Madison last summer gave Enbridge three years to shut down part of Line 5 that runs across the Bad River Band of Lake Superior’s reservation. The company has proposed rerouting the pipeline around the reservation and has appealed the shutdown order to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

On a separate legal track, environmental groups and the Bad River Band have asked a judge to void state permits for the reroute. Hearings in that matter are scheduled to stretch into October.

By REBECCA BOONE

A judge has temporarily barred the federal government from collecting personal information about residents enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program in 21 states and Washington, D.C.

Related Articles

Trump to sign proclamation imposing $100K fee for H-1B visa applications, White House official says

Trump appointee George Cook takes interim lead at Census Bureau amid new census push

Trump administration asks Supreme Court to strip legal protections from Venezuelan migrants

Trump administration proposes selling nearly $6 billion in weapons to Israel

More than 400 arrests made in Chicago area operation so far, top immigration official says

U.S. District Judge Maxine Chesney in California issued the temporary restraining order against the U.S. Department of Agriculture on Thursday, and said a hearing would be held next month to determine if a longer-term prohibition is necessary.

Chesney found that states were likely to succeed in their argument that the personal data can only be used for things like administering the food assistance program, and that it generally can’t be shared with other entities. The states said they feared that the data would be used to aid mass deportation efforts.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, is a social safety net that serves more than 42 million people nationwide. Under the program formerly known as food stamps, the federal government pays 100% of the food benefits, while the states determine who is eligible for the benefits and then issue them to enrollees.

The Trump administration has worked to collect data on millions of U.S. residents through various federal agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, sharing the information with the Department of Homeland Security to support deportation efforts. The USDA warned states in July that if they failed to turn over the information about people enrolled in the federal food assistance program, SNAP funding would be cut off.

In response, the coalition of states sued, saying they feared the data would be used to aid mass deportations. They told the judge that the federal SNAP Act requires states to safeguard the information they receive from SNAP applicants, only releasing it for limited purposes related to administering or enforcing the food assistance program.

In Thursday’s ruling, Chesney said the states’ argument was likely to succeed, and that the USDA had already announced it planned to share the data with other entities and use it for purposes not allowed by the SNAP Act.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on March 20 directing agencies to ensure “unfettered access to comprehensive data from all state programs” as part of the administration’s effort to stop “ waste, fraud and abuse by eliminating information silos.”

The case is at least the second lawsuit filed over the USDA’s attempt to collect SNAP information. Privacy and hunger relief groups and a handful of people receiving food assistance benefits filed a similar lawsuit in Washington, D.C., in May, but the federal judge in that case declined to issue a preliminary injunction to stop the data collection.

Some states have already turned over the data.

Associated Press reporter Kimberly Kindy contributed.

“If we expand those investments, five years from now, we can have a larger generation of students — especially Black, brown, and immigrant youth — prepared and inspired to lead.”

Juan, a participant in Futures Ignite’s Urban Ecology in the Heights program last year. (Courtesy Futures Ignite)

This past summer, you could find Juan at the Mercedes Club pool, perched on a lifeguard stand and scanning the water with steady focus. A little shy and incredibly tenacious, he had landed one of the hardest summer jobs for New York City teens. The summer before, he worked further uptown with Futures Ignite’s Urban Ecology Lab, testing air and water quality at Sherman Creek through our partnership with the New York Restoration Project.

Juan is a senior at the Washington Heights Expeditionary Learning School, the son of Dominican immigrants, and a quiet, determined leader. Since 10th grade, he has immersed himself in Futures Ignite: researching with the Clean Air Green Corridor Lab, testing water quality with the Urban Ecology Summer Institute, and joining college trips. 

His persistence shows up in small moments. At our Urban Ecology Summer Symposium, when his team was missing a crucial water sample, Juan hopped on a CitiBike, collected it from the Harlem River, and returned in time for his team to finish strong. Now, he is applying to college, dreaming of studying computer science and finance, while continuing to grow as an environmental and STEM leader.

At Futures Ignite, our mission is to partner with high schools so every student can explore, lead, launch, and persist in bold college and career futures. Each year, we support more than 1,500 students in northern Manhattan and the Bronx with after-school, summer, leadership, and career experiences that open doors and make those futures possible. We believe all young people deserve the investment and support to set bold goals—and the opportunities to achieve them.

Half of all New York City youth have at least one immigrant parent. In neighborhoods like Washington Heights and Kingsbridge, the number is even higher. These are the communities where Futures Ignite works every day—and where the stakes could not be higher.

Immigrant families are under attack. Across the nation, and even here in New York City, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has detained high school students. We must prevent this from happening again.

New York City has taken important steps. Our sanctuary school policies ensure ICE cannot enter schools without a warrant, offering a critical layer of protection. But schools are more than buildings that keep agents out—they are the lifelines of our communities. True safety must go further: belonging for Black and brown students in a school system still deeply segregated and unequal; freedom from gun violence; investment in restorative justice; and schools that affirm culture, language, and identity. Above all, safety must mean spaces where every young person is supported to dream, to lead, and to thrive.

The Department of Education’s Future Ready NYC initiative is another step forward, expanding career pathways and strengthening college connections. It shows what’s possible when the city invests in young people’s futures. But Future Ready must grow into a far greater investment that reaches all students, not just some. If New York is serious about being a sanctuary city, it must mean more than keeping ICE out of school doors—it must mean investing in the everyday safety, leadership, and futures of immigrant students inside those doors.

Schools, families, and community organizations are already showing what this looks like. Teachers and leaders stand shoulder to shoulder with families, advocating far beyond the classroom. That solidarity is powerful—and we need more of it. At the same time, we cannot let crisis define our vision. While we fight to defend our young people, we must also invest in them—ensuring they not only survive, but thrive, lead, and shape the future of this city.

Juan shows us what that looks like too. A teenager applying to college and planning his future, he scrolls through feeds filled with attacks on immigrants and hears leaders question his family’s right to be here. The ordinary milestones of adolescence unfold against a backdrop of exclusion and doubt—yet he keeps moving forward, focused on his goals despite the noise around him. His persistence is proof of what becomes possible when families, schools, and community organizations stand with young people and invest in their futures.

If we expand those investments, five years from now, we can have a larger generation of students—especially Black, brown, and immigrant youth—prepared and inspired to lead. That means free, dynamic after-school and summer programs, meaningful leadership opportunities, internships and job training, and individualized college/postsecondary counseling.

When students like Juan are supported, they thrive. They become lifeguards, lead science research, prepare for college, and give back to their communities. Their leadership isn’t in question—they are already part of New York’s strength today and the leaders our city needs for tomorrow.

We can fight today’s fires while planting the seeds for tomorrow. If we want New York to remain a city of promise, we must double down on long-term investments in immigrant youth. That means Future Ready, Futures Ignite, and the work of other after-school, summer, and community-based programs building pathways to college, career, and leadership. Together, these programs don’t just remind young people like Juan that their dreams are worth backing—they help those dreams take root and grow.

Because when immigrant youth thrive, all of New York City thrives, and so does its future.

Molly Delano is the executive director at Futures Ignite.

The post Opinion: Immigrant Youth Are New York’s Future. It’s Time We Invest Like It appeared first on City Limits.

By KATE BRUMBACK, Associated Press

ATLANTA (AP) — Lawyers for a Spanish-language journalist who has been in immigration detention in Georgia since June said Friday they’re worried his deportation could be imminent after an appeals panel reopened an old immigration case against him and ordered him sent back to El Salvador.

Local police just outside Atlanta arrested Mario Guevara while he was covering a protest on June 14, and he was turned over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. An immigration judge in July granted him bond, but he remained in custody while the government appealed.

All criminal charges filed against Guevara after his arrest have been dismissed. An immigration case against him was administratively closed more than a decade ago, and his lawyers have said he was authorized to live and work in the U.S. He’s being punished for doing his work as a journalist — particularly filming ICE and other law enforcement activity — in violation of his constitutional rights, his lawyers have argued.

An unfavorable ruling

The Board of Immigration Appeals, which hears appeals of immigration court rulings, on Friday dismissed the government’s appeal of the bond order, saying it was moot. The order says records show that the board had denied Guevara’s appeal of a previous deportation order. The board said the deportation order is now final and that neither an immigration judge nor the board has the authority to set a bond.

But lawyers for Guevara argue that the board’s order is based on incorrect information. In a separate case they have filed in federal court, they asked a judge on Friday to hold an emergency hearing and issue an immediate order for his release. They said in a filing that they feared the Board of Immigration Appeals decision “could have immediate consequences.”

Related Articles

Army says 4 soldiers died in a helicopter crash in Washington state this week

Trump administration asks Supreme Court to strip legal protections from Venezuelan migrants

More than 400 arrests made in Chicago area operation so far, top immigration official says

Texas A&M president steps down but doesn’t say if controversial classroom video was a factor

US attorney whose office is investigating Letitia James is told he’s being removed, AP source says

The appeals board based its ruling on a decision in an immigration case against Guevara from 13 years ago, said Scarlet Kim, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union. The immigration judge in that case rejected Guevara’s bid to stay in the U.S. but granted him voluntary departure rather than ordering him deported, Kim said.

Guevara appealed that ruling to the Board of Immigration Appeals at the time, but while that appeal was pending, the government agreed to administratively close the case, and he was granted authorization to live and work in the U.S., his lawyers have said.

When he was taken into ICE custody in June, the government sought to reopen that old case. His immigration attorney asked that the matter be sent back to an immigration judge because Guevara now has a pathway to legal residency and a petition pending through his U.S. citizen adult son, Kim said. The Board of Immigration Appeals also rejected that request.

Kim said the Board of Immigration Appeal’s ruling Friday incorrectly said that an immigration judge had ordered him deported and based its ruling on that incorrect information.

“We don’t know what the status of his actual deportation is, but his immigration counsel is concerned that he’s going to be deported ASAP based on their understanding of what happens when the government thinks there’s a final order of removal in place,” Kim said.

Neither ICE nor the Department of Homeland Security responded to messages from The Associated Press seeking comment on the government’s plans for Guevara.

Guevara’s work as a journalist

Guevara, 48, fled El Salvador two decades ago out of fear, and amassed a big audience as a journalist in the Atlanta area. He worked for Mundo Hispanico, a Spanish-language newspaper, for years before starting a digital news outlet called MG News a year ago. He was livestreaming video on social media from a “No Kings” rally protesting President Donald Trump’s administration when local police arrested him in DeKalb County.

Guevara is known for arriving on the scene where ICE or other law enforcement agencies are active, often after getting tips from community members. He regularly livestreams what he’s seeing on social media.

Video from his arrest shows Guevara wearing a bright red shirt under a protective vest with “PRESS” printed across his chest. He could be heard telling a police officer, “I’m a member of the media, officer.” He was standing on a sidewalk with other journalists, with no sign of big crowds or confrontations around him, moments before he was taken away.

Criminal charges that have been dismissed

Police charged Guevara with unlawful assembly, obstruction of police and being a pedestrian on or along the roadway. He was granted bond in DeKalb, but ICE had put a hold on him and he was held until they came to pick him up.

DeKalb County Solicitor-General Donna Coleman-Stribling on June 25 dismissed the charges, saying that video showed that Guevara was “generally in compliance and does not demonstrate the intent to disregard law enforcement directives.”

The sheriff’s office in neighboring Gwinnett County announced on June 20, that once Guevara was already in ICE custody, it had secured warrants against him on charges of distracted driving, failure to obey a traffic control device and reckless driving. Gwinnett County Solicitor-General Lisamarie Bristol announced July 10 that she would not pursue those charges.