A New Jersey appeals court reversed a lower court ruling requiring the e-mails be made public and authorizing a judge to inspect the communications.

The Democratic governor has been fighting to keep the correspondence between himself, his staff and Carla Katz private since the e-mails were requested by a Republican leader and several news organizations, including The Associated Press.

A three-judge appeals panel said the e-mails are covered by executive privilege, which allows officials to withhold certain information in the interest of governing.

An appeal to the state Supreme Court is anticipated.

Attorney General Anne Milgram argued that Corzine would not be able to govern effectively if his private communications were open to the public. A lawyer for the GOP, Mark Sheridan, argued that the public has a right to view e-mails the governor's office and Katz exchanged during state worker contract talks.

Tom Wilson, the Republican state committee chairman, sought disclosure of all e-mails that were not strictly personal or concerning general state business. He questioned whether the state worker contract negotiations were tainted by the relationship between Corzine and Katz.

The two dated before Corzine became governor. She is president of the largest state worker local, Communications Workers of America Local 1034.

"No one should have to worry about getting a death threat because of the way he or she votes," said James Bopp Jr., an attorney representing two groups that supported Proposition 8, Protect Marriage.com and the National Organization for Marriage California. "This lawsuit will protect the right of all people to help support causes they agree with, without having to worry about harassment or threats."

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in federal court in Sacramento, asks the court to order the secretary of state's office to remove all donations for the proposition from its Web site.

It also asks the court to relieve the two groups and "all similarly situated persons" from having to meet the state's campaign disclosure requirements. That would include having to file a final report on Proposition 8 contributions at the end of January, as well as reports for any future campaigns the groups undertake.

Proposition 8, approved by 52.3 percent of California voters on Nov. 4, reversed a state Supreme Court decision allowing gay marriage. The measure's opponents have asked the Supreme Court to overturn it.

The lawsuit filed Wednesday cites a series of incidents in which those who gave money to support Proposition 8 received threatening phone calls, e-mails and postcards. One woman claims she was told: "If I had a gun, I would have gunned you down along with each and every other supporter."

Another donor reported a broken window, one said a flier calling him a bigot was distributed around his hometown and others received envelopes containing suspicious white power, according to the lawsuit.

Minneapolis attorney Tom Kelly says he concluded that the state Supreme Court would not accept a petition for further review of the case, so it would be a futile exercise. He says that means the legal wrangling in the case is over.

Thursday was the 30-day deadline for Craig to ask the high court to review a Minnesota Court of Appeals decision that went against him.

The Idaho Republican was arrested in 2007 by an undercover police officer who was conducting a sting operation against men cruising for gay sex at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The senator quietly pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct and paid a fine, but changed his mind after word of his arrest became public. He insisted he was innocent and that he was not gay. He did not seek re-election.

The House impeachment panel is racing to complete its job, possibly by the end of this week. But the efforts of federal prosecutors to give the panel some of the FBI tapes face a potential obstacle course in court that could take up several weeks.

"These tapes are relevant evidence; we'd like to have them," said David Ellis, a lawyer for the impeachment panel. But he said the panel could wrap up its work as early as this week, and "we have already gathered a large volume of evidence."

Blagojevich, 52, a two-term Democrat, is charged along with former Chief of Staff John Harris with a scheme to sell or trade the U.S. Senate seat left vacant by Barack Obama's election as president.

Blagojevich is also charged with illegally plotting to use his power as governor to squeeze roadbuilders, a harness racing executive and the head of a children's hospital, among others, for hefty campaign contributions.

Prosecutors propose to provide the impeachment panel with a few minutes of the extensive recordings the FBI made of the governor talking with aides and others.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan issued the ruling Monday, reversing a lower court judge.

The appeals court found that the detainees and their families have a privacy interest in their identifying information. The government had argued that the detainees faced possible harm if their identities were revealed.

The appeals court said that The Associated Press, which sought the identities, had not shown how the public interest would be served by disclosing them.

A lawyer for the AP said he would comment after he studies the ruling.

The Financial Services Committee will question the SEC's internal watchdog Monday, as lawmakers try to learn why the regulatory agency failed to detect an alleged $50 billion investment fraud by Madoff.

Madoff's alleged Ponzi scheme will be a case study for a planned overhaul of laws regulating financial markets, said Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., who will chair the hearing.

Witnesses include H. David Kotz, the SEC inspector general. He's already is looking into the agency's failure to uncover the fraud despite several warnings.

Kotz previously said he will examine the relationship between a former SEC attorney and Madoff's niece, who are now married.