The 30-day removal deadline in §1446(b)(1) admits no equitable tolling; Enbridge's removal was untimely and the case must be remanded to state court.

1) The question is whether §1446(b)(1)'s 30-day deadline for filing a notice of removal can be extended by equitable tolling in a case concerning state regulation of an interstate pipeline that implicates Article III federal-question jurisdiction. 2) Relevant constitutional text: Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 extends judicial power to cases arising under federal law, including Commerce Clause disputes (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3); Article III, Section 1 vests 'the judicial Power' in federal courts subject to congressional regulation of procedures; Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 authorizes necessary and proper laws for such courts; Tenth Amendment reserves non-delegated powers to states, including enforcement in state courts unless properly removed. 3) Ratification-era understanding: The Judiciary Act of 1789 implemented Article III with limited removal (diversity only, no strict time limit initially), but Congress from the start imposed mandatory procedures without general equitable overrides; equity courts applied laches only where no statute spoke strictly, and statutes used 'shall' to bind without exception unless listed; Bill of Rights (Seventh Amendment) preserves jury trial rights but defers to congressional process rules. 4) The holding: §1446(b)(1) states a defendant 'shall file' within 30 days—mandatory text with listed exceptions (e.g., §1446(b)(3) for later-ascertained removability, §1446(c)(1) bad-faith cap) rebuts any equitable tolling, consistent with 1789 practice of strict statutory procedures; no tolling applies, removal untimely, remand to Michigan court. 5) Downstream changes: Circuits must enforce §1446(b)(1) rigidly; promotes prompt jurisdictional resolution, protects state sovereignty under Tenth Amendment for state-law claims unless timely federal removal; no impact on merits of pipeline easement under Commerce Clause or contracts.