*1 Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2006) 1 Opinion in Chambers NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash- ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
_________________ No. 06A592 _________________ RODGER STROUP, DIRECTOR, SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY, ET AL . v. THOMAS L. WILLCOX ET AL . ON APPLICATION FOR STAY [December 18, 2006] C HIEF J USTICE R OBERTS , Circuit Justice.
The State of South Carolina and Rodger Stroup, the director of the State’s Department of Archives and His- tory, apply for a stay of the judgment issued by the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit pending the filing and disposition of a petition for writ of certiorari in this Court. Their request fails to meet our standard for such relief. See Barnes v. E-Systems, Inc. Group Hospital Medical & Surgical Ins. Plan , 501 U. S. 1301, 1302 (1991) (S CALIA , J., in chambers).
Moreover, a request for extraordinary equitable relief is certainly undermined when the central argument pressed was only mentioned by applicants in passing in the court below. Applicants’ request is based almost exclusively on the Court of Appeals’ failure to certify to the Supreme Court of South Carolina contested questions of state prop- erty law. In their initial submission to the Court of Ap- peals, however, applicants requested that the court rule on the merits of the matter. They merely noted that certifica- tion “is an option for [the] Court if it wants guidance from the South Carolina Supreme Court.” Brief for Appellants in No. 06–1179 (CA4), p. 37, n. 9.
Accordingly, the request for a stay is denied.