The justices declined, without comment, to consider the constitutionality of a voluntary program passed by the Legislature and that took effect in 2004.

The program provides campaign money for state Supreme Court and Court of Appeals candidates if they agree to fundraising restrictions leading up to the general election. The decision came on the eve of an election in which all but two of the 13 candidates for those seats Tuesday participated in the program.

The decision leaves a federal lower court ruling in effect that upheld the law, which has been a model for other states, including New Mexico.

"This gives supporters of judicial public financing and public financing in general confidence and assurance that the long line of decisions (supporting) public financing ... are still the law of the land," said Paul Ryan, an attorney with the Washington-based Campaign Legal Center, whose group earlier filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the law.

Former Supreme Court candidate Rusty Duke and the North Carolina Right to Life Committee sued over the law in 2005, arguing it restricted free speech rights in cases where outside groups or nonparticipating candidates exceeded spending thresholds.

The qualifying candidates receive matching "rescue funds" to counter such injections of money.

The state's requirements that privately funded candidates and independent expenditure groups must file additional paperwork when they spend money to determine if rescue funds are triggered also "impose a substantial unconstitutional burden on the political speech" of these entities, according to the plaintiff's petition.

The Richmond, Va.-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the state in May. Attorneys for Duke and the group asked the high court unsuccessfully to consider the case in part because interest in public financing has expanded nationwide.

The dispute between the broadcast networks and the Federal Communications Commission is the court's first major broadcast indecency case in 30 years.

At issue is the FCC's policy, adopted in 2004, that even a one-time use of profanity on live television is indecent because some words are so offensive that they always evoke sexual or excretory images. So-called fleeting expletives were not treated as indecent before then.

The words in question begin with the letters "F" and "S." The Associated Press typically does not use them.

Chief Justice John Roberts, the only justice with young children at home, suggested that the commission's policy is reasonable. The use of either word, Roberts said, "is associated with sexual or excretory activity. That's what gives it its force."

Justice John Paul Stevens, who appeared skeptical of the policy, doubted that the f-word always conveys a sexual image.

Former Vice-Defense Minister Takemasa Moriya was also ordered to pay 12.5 million yen ($125,400) in penalties — the value of the gifts and entertainment he pocketed, the Tokyo District Court official said on condition of anonymity, citing department policy.

In his ruling, Judge Minoru Uemura said Moriya received golf trips, cash and other gifts when he was vice-defense minister 2003-2007, knowing that favorable treatment in contracts was expected in return.

According to a summary of the ruling published in Japanese newspapers, Moriya took golf trips worth about 8.86 million yen ($88,900) on 120 occasions from two defense trading companies led by Motonobu Miyazaki, a former executive of Yamada Yoko Corp. Moriya also accepted 3.64 million yen ($36,500) in cash gifts from Miyazaki and his two aides, paid into the bank accounts of his wife and his daughter.

Moriya, in return, recommended Miyazaki's companies in ministry procurement deals, including the 2004-2005 purchase of General Electric Co. C-X engines for next generation Japanese cargo aircraft.

The deal, worth 600 million yen, was handled — without bids — by Miyazaki's company Yamada Yoko, the Japanese agent for GE engine at the time, according to the ministry.

Minnetonka, Minn.-based UnitedHealth reported a 28 percent drop in third-quarter profit, driven in part by higher operating costs, lower investment income and settlements for class-action lawsuits. The second-largest U.S. health insurer said its net earnings fell to $920 million, or 75 cents per share, in the quarter ending Sept. 30, down from $1.28 billion, or 95 cents per share, in the same quarter last year.

But UnitedHealth also said revenue rose 8 percent to $20.2 billion from $18.7 billion a year ago.

Its adjusted profit was 73 cents per share, excluding a 2-cent benefit from a change in the estimate of net costs to settle a couple stock option-related lawsuits.

That matched Wall Street expectations. Analysts polled by Thomson Reuters also expected $20.04 billion in revenue.

Company shares rose to $23.75, up from a previous closing price of $21.67.

Goldman Sachs analyst Matthew Borsch said the insurer's results wound up 3 cents per share above his firm's estimate. Overall, the results show a "significant improvement" over the first half, Borsch said in a research note.

He also noted that the company's investment portfolio "remains sound and conservatively positioned."

UnitedHealth saw its total operating costs rise 12 percent to $18.6 billion due mainly to an 11 percent rise in medical costs.

The company also saw a 52 percent drop in investment income to $143 million from $302 million in the quarter.

UnitedHealth normally is the first large managed-care company to release earnings each quarter and is seen by many as a bellwether for the sector.

The company announced in July an $895 million payout to settle a class-action lawsuit over options backdating, a problem it has been wrestling with since 2006. The issue had led to the forced departure of former CEO Bill McGuire, who helped build UnitedHealth into a managed-care powerhouse.

The insurer agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit led by the California Public Employees Retirement System and Alaska Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry Pension Trust. The plaintiffs had argued that options backdating cost shareholders money.

UnitedHealth also agreed to pay $17 million to resolve another suit related to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.

Bush promised Obama his "complete cooperation" during the Democrat's 76-day transition to the White House. The president said he would keep Obama informed on all his decisions between now and Jan. 20, and said he looked forward to the day — soon, he hopes — that Obama and his family would take him up on his offer of a pre-inauguration White House visit.

But perhaps most striking about the Republican president's brief Rose Garden remarks was the stream of compliments he paid to Obama and the multiple nods to the history-making nature of his ascension.

Bush called Obama's win an "impressive victory" and said it represented strides "toward a more perfect Union." He said the choice of Obama was "a triumph of the American story, a testament to hard work, optimism and faith in the enduring promise of our nation."

The defeated leader of his own party, John McCain, won accolades as well, but not nearly so glowing.

"The American people will always be grateful for the lifetime of service John McCain has devoted to this nation, and I know he'll continue to make tremendous contributions to our country," Bush said.

To a country with monumental civil rights battles in its past, Bush said: "All Americans can be proud of the history that was made yesterday."

He recalled the millions of blacks who turned out to vote for one of their own, saying he realizes many never fully believed they would live to see this day. But he also hinted that he has personal feelings of high emotion at this moment, representing the end of a controversial eight years in the Oval Office during which he tried, but failed, to attract more blacks to his party.

"It will be a stirring sight to see President Obama, his wife, Michelle, and their beautiful girls step through the doors of the White House," the president said. "I know millions of Americans will be overcome with pride at this inspiring moment that so many have waited so long."

The justices, in an order Monday, accepted the appeal of prosecutors in Alaska. They asked the court to overturn a federal appeals court ruling in favor of William Osborne, who was convicted of rape, kidnapping and assault in an attack on a prostitute in 1993.

The woman was raped at gunpoint, beaten with an ax handle, shot in the head and left for dead in a snow bank near the Anchorage International Airport.

Osborne admitted his guilt under oath to the parole board in 2004. Another man also convicted in the attack has repeatedly identified Osborne as having participated in the crimes. The testing would be done on a condom and hairs found by investigators.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San Francisco, said Osborne has a right to subject the evidence to advanced DNA testing that was not available at the time of his trial.

Forty-four states and the federal government have laws that give convicts access to DNA testing, but Alaska does not.

Osborne urged the court to reject the appeal, saying that because so many states have laws on the topic, it rarely arises in federal court.

Prosecutors argued that even if testing determines that the hairs and sperm are not Osborne's, other evidence introduced at his trial is sufficient to leave his conviction in place. That matter is not before the high court.

The case is District Attorney's Office v. Osborne, 08-6.

U.S. District Judge Keith P. Ellison made the comment after a nearly two-hour hearing in which attorneys for both sides reiterated arguments they had already briefed in court filings over the last few months.

The issues before Ellison are whether or not he should throw out the lawsuit and if he doesn't, whether it should stay in Texas.

"I really have been agonizing over these claims," Ellison said.

Clemens sued Brian McNamee in January after the pitcher's former trainer told baseball investigator and former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell that the seven-time Cy Young Award winner used steroids and human growth hormone.

Clemens' attorney, Joe Roden, said his client had agreed to drop one claim against McNamee, for intentional infliction of emotional distress, because it was covered in other parts of the lawsuit.

A 354-game winner, Clemens is under investigation by the FBI after denying McNamee's claims while under oath during a deposition and public testimony before a congressional committee.