Missouri Attorney General Files Brief in \u201cRemain in Mexico\u201d Case, Oral Argument Set for November 2 JEFFERSON CITY, MO (STL.News) Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt yesterday filed a response brief to the Department of Justice\u2019s appeal in the Migrant Protection Protocols or \u201cRemain in Mexico\u201d case brought by Missouri and Texas.\u00a0 The brief was filed in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, and oral argument, in this case, is scheduled for November 2, 2021. \u201cWhile the crisis at the border continues to worsen, the Biden Administration terminated a successful tool to help combat that crisis and secure the border \u2013 the Migrant Protection Protocols, or the \u2018Remain in Mexico\u2019 policy.\u00a0 In April, we sued over that termination and won at the district court, court of appeals, and the United States Supreme Court, requiring the Biden Administration to reimplement the policy,\u201d said Attorney General Schmitt.\u00a0 \u201cWe\u2019re vigorously defending the district court\u2019s permanent injunction, and look forward to making our case on November 2nd.\u201d The brief makes four main arguments: that the district court correctly concluded that the states have standing, that the district court correctly determined that the decision to terminate MPP is subject to judicial review, that the district court correctly determined that the decision to terminate MPP was arbitrary and capricious and that the district court correctly concluded that the termination of MPP led appellants to violate systemically Section 1225. The brief states, \u201cThis Court and the district court got it right, as their well-reasoned findings and conclusions amply demonstrate.\u00a0 Appellants request reversal of a permanent injunction supported by a meticulous, 53-page opinion following a full trial on the merits. As explained in this Court\u2019s similarly thorough 34-page opinion, the district court\u2019s decision rests on several \u2018relevant\u2019 and \u2018largely uncontested\u2019 findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in painstaking detail.\u00a0 Most relevant here, the district court held that Appellants\u2019 termination of the effective Migrant Protection Protocols was arbitrary and capricious and further violated the Immigration and Nationality Act (\u2018INA\u2019) in \u2018the particular circumstances of this case.\u201d The brief continues, \u201cThe termination of MPP was unlawful in at least two key ways. First, it was arbitrary and capricious\u2026 Second, terminating MPP caused DHS to violate systematically the mandatory-detention provisions in Section 1225.\u201d The Missouri and Texas Attorney General\u2019s Offices are asking the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold the judgment of the district court and keep in place the permanent injunction requiring the Biden Administration to re-implement the \u201cRemain in Mexico\u201d Policy. In April, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed suit against the Biden Administration over their cancellation of the \u201cRemain in Mexico\u201d policy. In August, the district court in Texas issued a nationwide permanent injunction, requiring the Biden Administration to re-implement the program.\u00a0 The Office then prevailed at the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court as both courts denied the Department of Justice\u2019s request for a stay pending appeal. Recently, as the Haitian border crisis continues to deteriorate, the Office filed a motion to enforce the permanent injunction, arguing the Biden Administration has not been re-implementing the program in good faith. Last week, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals again sided with the Missouri Attorney General\u2019s Office and denied the Department of Justice\u2019s request to stay this case pending administrative review.