Dense fog in Baton Rouge kept Will Wade, Kim Mulkey and their players from getting to Birmingham for SEC basketball media days Tuesday morning. Their plane could not take off, so LSU’s coaches spoke remotely.

As far as the Southeastern Conference’s lawyers are concerned, LSU remains in a fog of its own. The Tigers have left the former NFL players off the football roster. Wade says he will follow the conference’s rules on RJ Luis Jr. Yet the SEC still cannot see enough to call off its lawsuit.

Wade’s answer on Luis was direct. The former St. John’s guard is not on the roster and did not travel to McNeese State for the exhibition. “We’re going to follow all the SEC protocols with him,” Wade said.

In its 41-page opposition filed October 13, the SEC asked U.S. District Judge Annemarie Carney Axon to deny LSU officials’ motion to dismiss. It pointed to LSU’s recruitment of Luis, his participation in practice and the absence of a definitive institutional commitment that he would stay off the roster.

The filing also contains a quieter but important move: the SEC withdrew its request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. No meeting is currently scheduled to consider terminating LSU’s membership. The conference reserved the right to seek emergency relief later.

The SEC wants the lawsuit to survive. Its immediate request does not ask Axon to expel LSU, declare a player ineligible or authorize punishment. Nothing in the filing changes LSU’s rosters or its conference membership.

For Commissioner Greg Sankey, withdrawing emergency relief preserves a legal argument without expanding his authority. Any move to terminate LSU’s membership would still have to go through the conference’s governing process. The commissioner has not received judicial permission to act unilaterally.

The SEC says LSU has submitted no sworn declaration promising compliance with its professionalism rules or pledging not to obstruct a future membership-termination effort. Wade’s public answer gives LSU something to cite, but the conference wants an assurance from the institution that carries weight in court.

LSU, meanwhile, is asking what more the conference needs. Dae’Quan Wright and Zxavian Harris are not playing football. Luis is not on the basketball roster. Those are actual decisions made with substantial penalties hanging over the school.

The SEC reinforced penalties that include a fine equal to half a team’s budget and a half-season suspension for its coach if a prohibited former professional is rostered. Lane Kiffin left Wright and Harris off the team, and the September 10 conference meeting ended without an expulsion vote.

LSU and Attorney General Liz Murrill then asked the federal court to dismiss the lawsuit. Their argument: the players were not rostered, the meeting went forward without interference and the dispute that brought everyone to court had passed.

Murrill’s response to Tuesday’s filing was considerably less restrained than the language of a motion to dismiss. She accused Sankey of bad faith and dismissed the premise of the lawsuit altogether.

“The new response by SEC lawyers proves that the Commissioner was never acting in good faith. LSU has broken no rules, and the case is moot. The lawsuit was garbage from the start and should be dismissed,” Murrill said in a statement.

There is no fog around where she stands. Whether the case is moot, though, is for Axon to decide. Murrill’s accusation of bad faith is her assessment of Sankey’s conduct, not a finding by the court.

The SEC says LSU is leaving out the core issue. It argues the fight has always been about whether LSU officials would interfere with the conference’s right to enforce its standards and, if necessary, end LSU’s membership. That broader claim was in the September amended complaint. Tuesday’s filing uses basketball to argue the problem remains.

Courts generally do not let a defendant make a lawsuit disappear simply by stopping the disputed conduct while leaving open the possibility of starting again. Otherwise, people could pause long enough to get a case dismissed, then resume the conduct.

But that principle does not settle this case. Axon still has to decide whether a live dispute remains and whether the conference has a valid federal claim. Saying LSU cannot be trusted does not establish a right to relief.

The SEC also must answer LSU’s objections to being sued in Alabama and the officials’ claim of sovereign immunity. It argues that federal law permits a suit seeking to stop future constitutional violations by state officials. That is another contested argument, not a ruling keeping Murrill and the LSU defendants in the case.

The basketball discussion also needs care. Luis signed an NBA contract. His attempt to return to college basketball runs directly into the SEC’s stated rules. A preliminary injunction from a Baton Rouge judge has not settled every issue, and Wade’s latest statement acknowledges the conference’s position.

The international players mentioned in the filing do not automatically belong in the same category. The SEC’s description of its professionalism rules identifies particular leagues and circumstances. Playing professionally overseas does not, by itself, put a player in Luis’s situation. Those eligibility questions deserve their own answers.

Wade’s earlier promise to be “unapologetic” about building his roster may sound defiant when it appears in a legal brief. But being unapologetic about recruiting is not proof that LSU will obstruct a conference vote. The SEC must show how the conduct it describes supports the protection it seeks.

That leaves a fair question. If the SEC already has the authority under its membership rules to expel LSU, what is preventing it from acting? The conference says state action and threatened interference put its constitutional rights at risk. That is the dispute Axon must sort out.

The SEC does not have to wait until Luis checks into a game to ask for protection. Its amended complaint already argues that the Louisiana injunction restricts its ability to enforce conference rules. If a court order still prevents lawful action, or LSU officials pose a credible threat of blocking it, that could keep the dispute alive.

But the conference must explain what restriction remains, how these defendants are responsible for it and why a federal court can remedy it. Leaving Luis off the roster does not automatically answer those questions. Neither does saying LSU might change its mind.

LSU’s reply is due October 20. Axon can rule on the papers, request more briefing or schedule argument. Even if she allows the case to continue, that would not mean the SEC has proved its allegations or that LSU is headed out of the conference.

The SEC got the football roster decisions it wanted, and Wade has now publicly promised compliance on Luis. It has also withdrawn its request for emergency relief while keeping its broader claims alive. Those facts belong together. The conference sees a continuing legal problem, but it is not pointing to a termination meeting on the calendar.

The weather kept LSU out of Birmingham. Whether the SEC has enough to keep LSU in federal court is a different question. There is no immediate membership vote for Axon to protect. What remains is the conference’s claim that its freedom to act is still restricted—and LSU’s argument that this lawsuit has outlived the dispute that produced it.