Judge Robert Hanson of the Polk County District triggered the license land rush when he ruled on Thursday that Iowa's law restricting marriage to a man and a woman was unconstitutional. His ruling faces appeals by state officials who want it reversed, but in the meantime the window was open.

The gay marriage issue is a hot one politically at all levels. Twenty-six states have constitutional amendments barring same-sex marriage. Three states allow civil unions for gay couples -- with only Massachusetts permitting full same-sex marriage. New Hampshire will allow gay civil unions beginning in January.

Fritz and McQuillan were among about a dozen couples waiting in a line that formed before dawn at the Polk County Courthouse.

Fritz said he proposed to McQuillan on Thursday night after hearing about the judge's ruling and then went to a store to buy wedding rings.

"He instant messaged me over the Internet that this was going on," McQuillan said. "When he picked me up around 9 o'clock he proposed to me on the spot. Besides the obvious shock, I still haven't recovered. Maybe it'll set in later this week."

Fritz said the two did a "lot of double-checking everything on the Internet to make sure that we got all the paperwork filled out correctly the first time. We didn't want to get refused because we messed up a 't' somewhere." Fritz says he called McQuillan's mother in California to ask permission to marry her son. Not everyone was as happy.House Republican Leader Christopher Rants of the Iowa Legislature called the ruling a "shocking" reversal of the will of the people of the state. He blamed Democrats saying they had refused to back an amendment to the state constitution that would have cemented the ban.

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, a former Massachusetts governor who has been campaigning in Iowa, called the decision another example of a ruling by an activist court. He said it demonstrates the need for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution outlawing gay marriages.

Michelle Gardner of Ames, a neighbor of Fritz and McQuillan who served as a witness on their marriage application, said "I'm just so happy to be in Iowa for this and so happy to be a part of their wedding."

Her 10-year-old daughter, Esther, clutching a bouquet, was in line to be the couple's flower girl.

In January 2006, PUCO approved the recovery of some of FirstEnergy's fuel costs through a fuel rider and allowed them to recover other fuel costs over a 25-year period beginning Jan. 2009 through distribution rates.

The court also found that said it did not believe PUCO addressed whether the deferral of recovery was anticompetitive. It sent the issue back to the commission for further consideration.

FirstEnergy said it plans to contest the court's interpretation and ask it to reconsider the ruling. It also intends to file a concurrent application with the PUCO, laying out a new plan for recovery of the fuel costs.

It said it would continue deferring the fuel costs until the court hears its motion to reconsider the case.

"Words can't express how sorry I am for the harm I have caused to others, especially my family," Plotkin said.

Plotkin was charged in 2006 in a scheme that involved David Pajcin, another Goldman Sachs analyst, and Stanislav Shpigelman, who met Plotkin in college and worked as an analyst at Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc.'s mergers and acquisitions division.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Helen Cantwell said the trio conspired on some of the most innovative and complicated insider-trading schemes since those of the 1980s.

In one instance, a New Jersey grand juror leaked information so Plotkin and Pajcin could learn details of an investigation of accounting fraud accusations against Bristol-Myers and several of its executives.

In a second plot, Pajcin and Plotkin arranged for a man to become a forklift operator at a printing plant so he could steal early copies of a market-moving column in BusinessWeek magazine.

Prosecutors say Shpigelman provided Plotkin and Pajcin with information on deals to give them an advantage in their trading.

In exchange for information on six different pending mergers or acquisitions, Shpigelman received cash and promises of future payments based on a percentage of profits, authorities said.

Although the charges carry a potential maximum prison term of 165 years, Plotkin signed a plea agreement in which he promised not to appeal any sentence between four years and nine months and five years and 11 months in prison.

Seeking to salvage his reputation and quell a media storm stirred by his guilty plea to disorderly conduct charges, the Republican senator Tuesday denied making a sexual advance to an undercover officer in a Minneapolis airport men's room two months ago.

"I am not gay and never have been," Craig declared at a Boise news conference with his wife, Suzanne, at his side.

But even as he denied making an advance, the case sent shock waves through Republican circles. Senate Republican leaders called for an ethics investigation and vowed to consider other sanctions.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, whose Idaho presidential campaign was headed by Craig until the charges came to light, compared the senator's behavior to former President Clinton's encounter with a White House intern and to former Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., who resigned last year in a scandal involving male House pages.

The charge grew out of a June 11 incident at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in which an officer investigating lewd-conduct complaints about activity in the restroom arrested Craig for allegedly making a sexual advance. The arrest and the senator's Aug. 1 guilty plea became public Monday, when they were reported by the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call.

Craig, 62, was ordered to pay $575 in fines and fees and given one year's probation. A sentence of 10 days in the county workhouse was stayed.

At the news conference, Craig, a leading voice on issues affecting the West and a consistent opponent of gay-rights legislation, apologized for his handling of the incident, saying he regretted his guilty plea.

He said he had retained a lawyer to review the plea, although he signed court papers declaring he had read the police report and understood the nature of the crime and paid the fine — which defense experts said would make a challenge difficult.

Craig said he pleaded guilty because his hometown newspaper, The Idaho Statesman, had been conducting an eight-month investigation into his sexual orientation. He said he hoped that resolving the case quietly — without telling his family, friends, staff or colleagues — would settle the matter without bringing it to light for what he called the newspaper's "witch hunt."

"I overreacted in Minneapolis, because of the stress of The Idaho Statesman investigation and the rumors it has fueled around Idaho," said Craig, who took no questions.

Craig has confronted sexually related accusations before. In 1982, he denied involvement in a congressional-page sex scandal.

The Statesman on Tuesday reported on rumors that Craig had engaged in restroom sexual encounters with other men. The newspaper began its inquiry after a gay activist blogger, Mike Rogers, published a claim that Craig had sex with men. Rogers cited anonymous sources.

The Statesman quoted an anonymous man who claimed he had sex with Craig in a restroom at Union Station in Washington, D.C. The newspaper, which interviewed 300 people, described other allegations but did not name those who made them.

In a May interview that the newspaper published Tuesday, Craig denied having had gay sexual encounters and specifically denied restroom encounters.

"I'm going to have to leave it up to other people to weigh the care we took. I'm a bit disappointed" with Craig's complaints, said Vicki Gowler, the newspaper's top editor. "We were quite responsible, and we took great care with the story."

Craig already was under pressure from Republicans to give up the seat he has held since 1991 rather than risk handing Democrats what has been a safe seat. He said he'll announce next month whether he will seek re-election.

Pressure accelerated Tuesday. The mug shot from Craig's arrest was broadcast on CNN accompanied by a headline: "Senator's Bathroom Bust." The Drudge Report went with the headline "Brokeback Bathroom." And the detailed arrest report was available on the Internet.

Greg Smith, an Idaho pollster who has worked for Craig, said it was "almost certain" the senator would not seek re-election.

David Adler, a political-science professor at Idaho State University, noted that GOP leaders would be unlikely to support any interest Craig might have in trying to hold his seat "since they would fear losing a seat that has been safe for so long."

Adler said Craig's swift resignation as co-chair of Romney's presidential campaign in Idaho provides a "good measure of the fever that has been inflicted."

Patrick Sammon, president of the Log Cabin Republicans, the largest organization for gays in the GOP, said Craig's ability to continue serving is "in serious doubt."

If Craig resigns, Republican Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter will appoint a successor, most likely a Republican, to serve the remainder of the term.

A former Democratic congressman, Larry LaRocco, is campaigning to replace Craig. LaRocco was elected to the House in 1990 but lost the seat in the 1994 GOP takeover.

LaRocco said he believes a Democrat can win even though none has been elected to the Senate from Idaho since Frank Church, who lost the seat in 1980. "People are in a plate-throwing mood out here, regardless of what happened with Larry Craig," LaRocco said.

Craig now is fighting a multifront battle, first and foremost a longshot bid to undo his guilty plea and the likely ethics probe, while also trying to shore up support among constituents should he decide to seek a fourth six-year term.

In his guilty plea, according to court records, Craig acknowledged engaging in physical "conduct which I knew or should have known tended to arouse alarm or resentment of others." Criminal-defense lawyers said it would be difficult for the senator to have the case reopened.

Successful motions to withdraw guilty pleas usually meet a high threshold, such as showing the person was misled into entering the plea, his constitutional rights were violated or there was wrongdoing by prosecutors, Minneapolis criminal-defense lawyer Peter Wold said.

But Craig's written plea specified the charges related to the airport incident, that he knew the judge couldn't accept a guilty plea from a person who felt he was innocent and that he was making no claim of innocence.

If he's successful in overturning his plea, Craig likely will have to face a public trial, Wold said.

A second charge of interference with privacy against the 62-year-old senator was dismissed. Mr. Craig was fined more than $500 at the Aug. 8 proceedings and was placed on unsupervised probation for one year. His 10-day jail sentence was suspended, according to a copy of a court document in the case.

According to a police report obtained by Roll Call, the Capitol Hill newspaper that disclosed the episode and guilty plea today, a plainclothes police officer investigating complaints of sexual activity in the bathroom arrested the senator on June 11 after what the officer described as sexual advances made by Mr. Craig from an adjoining stall.

Roll Call reported that the officer said Mr. Craig tapped his foot as a signal to engage in lewd conduct, brushed his foot against the investigator's and waved his hand under the stall divider several times before the officer showed him his badge. After his arrest, the senator denied any sexual intent and in a statement issued this afternoon he attributed the matter to a misunderstanding.

"At the time of this incident, I complained to the police that they were misconstruing my actions," Mr. Craig said in a statement. "I was not involved in any inappropriate conduct.

"I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have pled guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously."

Mr. Craig, whose seat is up for election next year, is the second Republican senator in recent weeks to find his personal behavior under scrutiny. Senator David Vitter of Louisiana was implicated in a separate case in the Washington area when his phone number turned up in the records of an escort service. He made a public apology for what he described as "a very serious sin in my past," but he has not been charged with any crime.

In the Senate, Mr. Craig, who is married and has three children, is known for his advocacy for the rights of gun owners and has a close association with the National Rifle Association. When Republicans controlled the Senate in the last Congress, Mr. Craig was chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee. He is a former member of the party's Senate leadership. He represented Idaho in the House before first winning election to an open Senate seat in 1990 and he was easily re-elected in 1996 and 2002.

In 2006, Mr. Craig publicly rejected allegations by a gay rights advocate that he had engaged in a homosexual behavior, calling them "completely ridiculous."

"Counterbalancing any cognizable interest that public employees may have in avoiding disclosure of their salaries is the strong public interest in knowing how the government spends its money," Chief Justice Ronald George wrote for the majority opinion signed by three other justices. Another three justices each wrote separate opinions essentially agreeing with the majority take, with Justices Marvin Baxter and Ming Chin arguing that police officers' salaries should be exempt from public disclosure.

The ruling Monday was the result of a Contra Costa Times' lawsuit against Oakland and it also should settle an almost identical lawsuit filed by the San Jose Mercury News demanding the names and salaries of every San Jose city worker who earned more than $100,000 annually.

"I think this sets the rule for the state," said media attorney Karl Olson, who represented the Times. "These are landmark cases that serve the public's right to know."

Some of the largest newspapers companies serving California, including the owners of the Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, the San Diego Union-Tribune, Sacramento Bee, New York Times and the Orange County Register filed friends of the court briefs in support of the Times.

Duane Reno, who represented the Oakland police officers argued that publicizing the salaries would open the employees to unwanted sales calls.

"Unfortunately the Supreme Court didn't feel that was a big enough invasion of privacy," Reno said.

The court also ruled in a separate 5-2 opinion that police officers' names, hiring and termination dates compiled in a massive state Department of Justice computer database also are fair game.

"It should have been a no brainer," said Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. "We are discovering that police departments across the country are increasingly withholding this kind of information."

The Arlington, Va.-based nonprofit joined the Los Angeles Times in its legal action against the California DOJ, which refused to turn over a decade's worth of police officer information to the newspaper. Several other news organizations, including The Associated Press, also filed court papers in support of the Times' case.

The newspaper said it planned to use the information to track the movements of police officers from one department to the other while also examining staffing levels.

"After months of unfair treatment that has created a harmful distraction at the Justice Department, Judge Gonzales decided to resign his position and I accept his decision," Bush said from Texas, where he is vacationing.

Solicitor General Paul Clement will be acting attorney general until a replacement is found and confirmed by the Senate, Bush said.

Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff was among those mentioned as possible successors, though a senior administration official said the matter had not been raised with Chertoff. Bush leaves Washington next Monday for Australia, and Gonzales' replacement might not be named by then, the official said.

"It has been one of my greatest privileges to lead the Department of Justice," Gonzales said, announcing his resignation effective Sept. 17 in a terse statement. He took no questions and gave no reason for stepping down.

Bush said the attorney general's "good name was dragged through the mud for political reasons." Though some Republicans echoed the president's veiled slap at Democrats, Gonzales had few defenders left in Washington.

Many Republicans actually welcomed his departure, some quietly and others publicly so.

Congressional aides and lawmakers agreed that any nomination of a new attorney general was almost certain to be acrimonious. The easiest prospects, some said, might be a current or former colleague of senators charged with the confirmation. Sen. Arlen Specter, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, told reporters Monday that he would not accept the job, if offered.

But, he said, another current or former senator "might be just the ticket."

"If you have a former senator or a present senator or somebody who is well known to the Senate or the committee...that's always a big help if you know the person," Specter told reporters in a telephone call as he traveled from Warsaw to Paris.

Asked, too, about whether Chertoff might be a good candidate, Specter replied:

"I think he's a first-rate prospect."

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards applauded Gonzales' resignation, saying it was "better late than never."

The announcement came as a surprise to many in the administration. Gonzales was tight-lipped about his thinking before going on vacation more than a week ago and aides were planning events for the next several months.

After spending time with his family in Texas, however, and facing the prospect of returning to Washington for months of continued fights with Congress, he called the president on Friday.

The White House has asked anyone staying past Labor Day to stay the remainder of the president's term.

Gonzales, formerly Bush's White House counsel, served more than two years at the Justice Department. In announcing his decision, Gonzales reflected on his up-from-the-bootstraps life story; he's the son of migrant farm workers from Mexico who didn't finish elementary school.

"Even my worst days as attorney general have been better than my father's best days," Gonzales said.

Bush steadfastly — and at times angrily — refused to give in to critics, even from his own GOP, who argued that Gonzales should go.

Earlier this month at a news conference, the president grew irritated when asked about accountability in his administration and turned the tables on the Democratic Congress.

"Implicit in your questions is that Al Gonzales did something wrong. I haven't seen Congress say he's done anything wrong," Bush said testily at the time. Actually, many in Congress had accused Gonzales of wrongdoing.

After the 52-year-old Gonzales called Bush Friday, the president had him come to lunch at his ranch on Sunday as a parting gesture, a senior administration official said.

Gonzales, whom Bush once considered for appointment to the Supreme Court, is the fourth top-ranking administration official to leave since November 2006, following Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, who had a high-ranking Pentagon job before going to the World Bank as its president, and top political and policy adviser Karl Rove.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., reacted to the announcement by saying the Justice Department under Gonzales had "suffered a severe crisis of leadership that allowed our justice system to be corrupted by political influence."

As attorney general and earlier as White House counsel, Gonzales pushed for expanded presidential powers, including the eavesdropping authority. He drafted controversial rules for military war tribunals and sought to limit the legal rights of detainees at Guantanamo Bay — prompting lawsuits by civil libertarians who said the government was violating the Constitution in its pursuit of terrorists.

"Alberto Gonzales was never the right man for this job. He lacked independence, he lacked judgment, and he lacked the spine to say no to Karl Rove," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

In a warning to the White House, Reid suggested that investigations into the Justice Department will not end until Congress gets "to the bottom of this mess."

One matter still under investigation is the 2006 dismissal of several federal prosecutors, who serve at the president's pleasure. Lawmakers said the action appeared to be politically motivated, and some of the fired U.S. attorneys said they felt pressured to investigate Democrats before elections.

Gonzales maintained that the dismissals were based the prosecutors' lackluster performance records.

In April, Gonzales answered "I don't know" and "I can't recall" scores of times while questioned by Congress about the firings. Even some Republicans said his testimony was evasive.

Not Bush. The president praised Gonzales' performance and said the attorney general was "honest" and "honorable."

In 2004, Gonzales pressed to reauthorize a secret domestic spying program over the Justice Department's protests. Gonzales was White House counsel at the time and during a dramatic hospital confrontation he and then-White House chief of staff Andrew Card sought approval from then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, who was in intensive care recovering from surgery. Ashcroft refused.

Similarly, Gonzales found himself on the defensive as recently as March because of the FBI's improper and, in some cases, illegal prying into Americans' personal information during terror and spy probes.