A powerful business group that spent millions of dollars to help elect two Wisconsin Supreme Court justices is proposing a rule that would allow them to hear its cases.

The court will consider the rule proposed by Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce during a public hearing Wednesday. Under the proposal, judges would not be required to step aside from cases involving groups or individuals no matter how much they spent to help their campaigns.

The rule would have immediate ramifications for two justices, Annette Ziegler and Michael Gableman, who were backed by WMC when elected to the court in 2007 and 2008. The group spent an estimated $2.2 million advocating for Ziegler and $1.76 million for Gableman, according to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, which tracks campaign spending.

The proposal comes as the state high court is considering whether to write specific rules for when judges must recuse themselves in cases involving campaign supporters. Current rules are silent on the issue but advise judges to step aside when a reasonable observer would question their impartiality.

The parents of a southern Minnesota teenager who once fled the state to avoid chemotherapy went before a judge Monday and asked for the court's role in the case to end, saying they are following the advice of doctors and making sure their son gets the best medical care.

Daniel Hauser, 13, is undergoing radiation treatments for childhood Hodgkin's lymphoma. He finished chemotherapy in early September, and his father said there is no sign of cancer.

"In all reality, he's been in remission for quite some time already," Anthony Hauser said in a telephone interview Monday. "I hope he stays in remission — that's No. 1. And hopefully we can live our lives normally again."

During a hearing in Brown County District Court, Judge John Rodenberg said that as long as no new issues arise, he would close the case after Daniel completes his 12 recommended sessions of radiation — which are expected to end Nov. 6, according to Joseph Rymanowski, an attorney for the parents.

Ohio is struggling to find medical professionals willing to advise the state on the best way to put condemned inmates to death.

Attorney General Richard Cordray says in a court filing that ethical and professional considerations are deterring doctors and others from offering advice about lethal injection.

Executions are on hold in Ohio while the state develops new injection policies following a Sept. 15 execution that was stopped because the inmate had no usable veins.

Cordray's concerns came in a filing in U.S. District Court Friday.

He says his office has reached out to judges, police and lawmakers for help trying to find medical professionals willing to talk to the state.

He also says five lawmakers he didn't identify have agreed to try to find medical staff to help.

The Kentucky Supreme Court is deciding whether the state has the power to seize Internet domain names involved in online gambling after hearing arguments Thursday from lawyers on both sides of the issue.

At issue is whether the more than 100 domain names the state has tried to seize are tantamount to gambling devices such as slot machines, and whether the state has authority for the seizures.

An appellate court has previously ruled that the state can't seize the domain names.

"They have been using these to violate the law in Kentucky," Eric Lycan, a private attorney representing the Kentucky Justice Cabinet, said. "They are subject to forfeiture."

The state previously sued 140 Web sites after determining that they allowed Kentuckians to gamble illegally and asked a judge to either force the sites to block Kentucky users or allow the state to take possession of the domain names — essentially shutting them down. Most of the sites are offshore and serve gamblers in and outside of the state.

Kentucky already allows gambling on horse racing and bingo and has a state lottery.

The Arkansas Supreme Court said Thursday it will review a case involving Southwestern Electric Power Company's planned coal-fired power plant in south Arkansas.

The state Court of Appeals had overturned a permit that was issued by the Arkansas Public Service Commission for the $1.6 billion John W. Turk Jr. plant in Hempstead County. SWEPCO appealed that decision, and now the Arkansas Supreme Court is going to review the case.

The Appeals Court ruling, issued in June, said the Public Service Commission's process for considering such permits has been flawed. If upheld, the ruling would require the plant to start that process over.

SWEPCO said Thursday it was pleased the high court was to review the case.

"This is an important case — both for the Turk Plant and for the process used to approve major utility projects in Arkansas for more than 30 years," said Paul Chodak, SWEPCO's president and chief operating officer. "We believe the record in the case will show that the approval process was correct and that the Turk Plant approval should stand."

SWEPCO said that as of Sept. 30, about $830 million had been spent on the Turk project.

Opponents have argued that the plant would violate the federal Clean Air Act.

A federal judicial panel has rejected California's plan for reducing the state's prison population because it failed to meet the terms of an earlier court order.

In August, the panel ordered California to reduce its inmate population by roughly 27 percent, or 40,000, over two years. The courts have found that prison overcrowding is the main cause of negligent medical and mental health care.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration subsequently submitted a plan calling for a reduction of 23,000 inmates.

On Wednesday, the judges gave the administration 21 days to submit a new plan. If it's inadequate, the court said it will develop its own.

In a statement, the administration said it objects to what it sees as an arbitrary inmate cap but will respond to the court on Nov. 12.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday temporarily blocked Washington state officials from releasing the names of people who signed referendum petitions to bring expanded rights for gay couples up for a public vote in November.

The court's action maintains a hold placed Monday by Justice Anthony Kennedy, who temporarily blocked a federal appeals court ruling that had ordered the release of the names. Justice John Paul Stevens was the only member of the court who indicated he would have turned down the stay request.

The court said its order would remain in effect while it decides whether to take up a request by Protect Marriage Washington, the group that wants to reverse the ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Referendum 71 asks voters to approve or reject the so-called "everything but marriage" law, which grants registered domestic partners the same legal rights as married couples. While most domestic partners are gay and lesbian couples, under state law opposite-gender seniors also can register as domestic partners.

Conservative Christian groups that sponsored R-71 want to keep the signed petitions out of public view because they fear harassment from gay-rights supporters, some of whom have vowed to post the names of petition signers on the Internet.