UPDATE III: Rep. Louise Slaughter, the powerful Democratic Chair of the House Rules Committee, played a leading role in forcing the removal of Graham-Lieberman from the spending bill.  I spoke with her today regarding her opposition, and that discussion -- roughly 8 minutes in length -- can be heard by clicking PLAY on the recorder below.  Rep. Slaughter's resolve to continue to block this bill is particularly important in light of the increasingly obnoxious obstructionism from Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham, who today succeeded in attaching their pernicious amendment to a different bill -- one that regulates various FDA matters and that is now on its way to the House.

From Roll Call:

Sen. Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) threatened to hold up any and all legislation in the Senate until Congress passes its legislation to prohibit the release of photos showing detainee abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"We're not going to do any more business in the Senate," Graham said. "Nothing's going forward until we get this right."

Both Senators said they were alarmed that a House-Senate conference committee on the supplemental war spending bill appears poised to eliminate language -- inserted by the two Senators -- that would block public disclosure of detainee abuse photos. The $90-billion-plus bill has been held up, in part, because House Democratic leaders have said they do not have the votes to pass it with the detainee photo provision included, because many liberal lawmakers have balked at the language.

If the provision is eliminated, Lieberman and Graham said they would vote against the supplemental and any attempts to bring debate on the measure to a close. Graham predicted that most, if not all, of the 40 Senate Republicans would do the same, and Lieberman said he would be reaching out to Democrats on the issue as well. That could be enough to filibuster the supplemental measure on the Senate floor, because 60 votes are needed to end debate on a bill.

Both men said the release of more photos showing U.S. soldiers abusing detainees at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and at prisons in Afghanistan would only inflame tensions in the Middle East and further serve as a recruiting tool for al-Qaida.

Lieberman said that the release of an earlier batch of photos from Abu Ghraib in 2004 had a positive effect, in that it rallied the Congress -- and the new president -- to outlaw such practices in the future. The release of additional photos, Lieberman argued, "to me is sheer voyeurism ... and will lead to the death of Americans."

Both Senators cited warnings from generals in the field and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that the photos could incite violence against Americans in the Middle East.

Graham accused House Democratic leaders of being beholden to "a fringe element in American politics" because he said they appear to be taking the side of the American Civil Liberties Union, which has sued the government under the Freedom of Information Act to obtain the other photos.

Noting that President Barack Obama supports the provision along with a large majority in the Senate, Graham said, "The only body that is off-script in my mind is the House. ... Is the ACLU now in charge of the House of Representatives?"

Lieberman and Graham's threat to halt Senate action is unlikely to affect progress of a bill to allow the Food and Drug Administration to regulate tobacco products. Senators voted Monday to clear the way for final passage either Tuesday or Wednesday.

The applications for stay presented to JUSTICE GINSBURG and by her referred to the Court are denied. The temporary stay entered by JUSTICE GINSBURG on June 8, 2009, is vacated.

A denial of a stay is not a decision on the merits of the underlying legal issues.  In determining whether to grant a stay, we consider instead whether the applicant has demonstrated "(1) a reasonable probability that four Justices will consider the issue sufficiently meritorious to grant certiorari or to note probable jurisdiction; (2) a fair prospect that a majority of the Court will conclude that the decision below was erroneous; and (3) a likelihood that irreparable harm will result from the denial of a stay." Conkright v. Fommert, 556 U. S. _, _ (2009) (slip op., at 1-2) (GINSBURG, J., in chambers) (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted).  In addition, "in a close case it may be appropriate to balance the equities," to assess the relative harms to the parties, "as well as the interests of the public at large." Id., at _ (slip op., at 2) (internal quotation marks omitted).

"A stay is not a matter of right, even if irreparable injury might otherwise result."  Nken v. Holder, 556 U. S. _, _ (2009) (slip op., at 14) (internal quotation marks omitted). It is instead an exercise of judicial discretion, and the "party requesting a stay bears the burden of show- ing that the circumstances justify an exercise of that discretion." Ibid. The applicants have not carried that burden.

"[T]he propriety of [a stay] is dependent upon the cir- cumstances of the particular case," and the "traditional stay factors contemplate individualized judgments in each case." Ibid. (internal quotation marks omitted).  Our as- sessment of the stay factors here is based on the record and proceedings in this case alone.