[Always Right]

Had the Court (the Justices) known that there was also a Petition for Cert, would they have acted differently on the "relief" plea?

No, apparently the emergency relief is up to one Justice. In this district Souter seems to have that authority, and there is no chance Souter would do that.

[Lurking Libertarian]

No, apparently the emergency relief is up to one Justice. In this district Souter seems to have that authority, and there is no chance Souter would do that.

In this case, Souter did not rule (although he could have). He took the second option under the Supreme Court rules, and asked the whole court to rule on the stay motion; the court denied it without recorded dissent. I don't think it would have mattered had they known of the cert. petition, because you can't ask for a stay unless you either file a cert. petition or promise to file one quickly.

[Congressman Billybob]

No, the Request for Emergancy Relief and the Petition for Writ of Certiorari are two different creatures. The granting of Emergency Relief guarantees that the Petition for Cert will also be granted. But the reverse is not true.

Because Emergency Relief requires a higher burden of proof than granting of Cert, the Court has in the past -- and can in this case -- deny the first but grant the second.

Billybob

Post Script: I have gotten about half a dozen Certs granted, but only one Emergency Relief (for Eugene McCarthy in September, 1976).