A decision by gay couples to wed represents "a personal expression of emotional devotion, support and interdependence and a public commitment," state Supreme Court Judge Lucy Billings wrote in a decision issued Tuesday. "With that validity, they expect equal treatment with other married couples."

Thousands of gay New Yorkers over the next few years are expected to make use of Massachusetts' recent decision to let out-of-state gay couples marry there. The Christian legal organization that brought the New York case said it would appeal, while gay-rights and civil-liberties groups hailed the ruling as strengthening legal support for same-sex couples.

In a statement, Gov. David Paterson called it "a wise and fair determination."

Same-sex couples cannot marry in New York, and the state's highest court has said only the Legislature has the authority to change that. But Paterson's counsel told state agencies in May that a recent state appellate court ruling required them to recognize gay marriages legally performed elsewhere or risk discrimination claims.

The directive prompted a lawsuit from the Alliance Defense Fund, an Arizona-based group that has repeatedly challenged attempts to extend spousal rights to gay couples in New York. Several Republican state senators had signed onto the latest suit.

The alliance is involved in cases around the country that concern gay marriage, abortion, school prayer and other social issues. It already had several ongoing cases over attempts to extend spousal rights to gay couples in New York.

Darryl Burton, 46, was scheduled to appear Tuesday at a news conference in Kansas City along with the lawyers and supporters who fought for eight years to have his conviction and life sentence thrown out.

Burton was released from the Jefferson City Correctional Center on Friday, the same day prosecutors in St. Louis decided against trying him a second time.

Attorney Cheryl Pilate, of suburban Kansas City, said Monday night that she and co-counsel Charlie Rogers picked Burton up at the prison, along with a Columbia pastor who had befriended him.

"He had his first meal in Columbia with us," Pilate said. The group then went to St. Louis so that Burton could visit with family members, including "nieces and nephews he had never seen before. That was wonderful." He also has family in Kansas City and will live there, she said.

No physical evidence or suggested motive had ever tied Burton to the June 1984 shooting death of Donald Ball at an Amoco station in St. Louis. Instead, he was convicted solely on the testimony of two men who claimed to have witnessed the shooting.

But one of those witnesses, Claudex Simmons, lied during Burton's 1985 trial in St. Louis Circuit Court when he testified that his own criminal history consisted of just two convictions.

Simmons had actually been convicted of at least seven felonies and five misdemeanors — information that should have been disclosed to the jury, Cole County Circuit Judge Richard G. Callahan wrote in an Aug. 18 ruling accompanying a writ of habeas corpus.

No prisoners so far have sought to arrange weddings with same-sex partners since the state Supreme Court granted same-sex couples the right to wed as of mid-June, according to Michele Kane, spokeswoman for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

Nonetheless, department lawyers are drafting guidelines to bring the state's 33 adult prisons into compliance with the court's ruling that same-sex couples must be treated the same as opposite-sex couples under the California Constitution, Kane said.

What they have determined so far is that would mean allowing gay inmates to marry someone on the outside, but not a fellow prisoner — the same rules that apply to straight inmates, according to Kane.

"They will have the same marriage rights as other inmates — they will be able to marry non-inmates, but barred from marrying other inmates in prison," she said.

Prison officials were concerned that allowing two men or two women in the same prison to get married would pose novel safety and security concerns, according to Kane.

Hundreds of detainees are awaiting hearings in a Washington federal court in the coming months to determine whether they were properly labeled enemy combatants and imprisoned without being charged.

U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon, who has said he wants to resolve the 24 cases assigned to him before the next president is sworn in, urged President Bush's administration to find a way for at least part of those cases to be held in public.

"If it can't be done, I have great concern that these hearings will be virtually or exclusively classified, closed to the public and, I might add, to the detainees," Leon said.

Leon said he would try to run a secure phone line from the military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to his courtroom so the detainees can listen to the hearing. Because prisoners are prohibited from hearing classified information, however, that effort would be useless if the entire hearing were classified.

Tharin Gartrell is due in Arapaho County Court on Thursday.

Authorities say police found scoped rifles, wigs, fake IDs and a bulletproof vest in the 28-year-old's rented truck after he was pulled over in the Denver area last weekend, ahead of the Democratic National Convention there. The resulting investigation led to the arrest of Gartrell and two other men who authorities say talked about killing Obama.

The U.S. Attorney's Office later said Gartrell and the other men were drug users making racists threats and had no firm assassination plot, and no capacity to carry out any attack.

Justice Department lawyers said Wednesday that they will soon ask a federal appeals court not to force the president's top advisers to comply with congressional subpoenas next month. President Bush argues Congress doesn't have the authority to demand information from his aides.

U.S. District Judge John Bates strongly rejected that stance last month, ordering former White House counsel Harriet Miers to testify and White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten to turn over documents related to the firing of federal prosecutors.

It was a historic loss for the Bush administration, a stinging ruling in the first such case ever to make it to the courts.

The House Judiciary Committee responded swiftly, demanding Miers appear Sept. 11 as it investigates whether federal prosecutors were inappropriately fired as part of a White House effort to politicize the Justice Department.

The Bush administration had already indicated it would appeal but Justice Department lawyers said Wednesday that they will ask the court to step in quickly and temporarily put Miers' appearance on hold while the appeal plays out. It's a risky move for an administration that has spent years trying to strengthen the power of the presidency.

If the appeals court refuses to temporarily block the testimony, it would essentially be endorsing Bates' ruling against the Bush administration. Miers likely would have to comply with the subpoena, setting a precedent that would give Congress new teeth in its investigations and weaken future presidents.

On the other hand, if the appeals court temporarily blocks Miers' testimony, it could allow the Bush administration to run out the clock before a new Congress comes to Washington and the case becomes moot. In that situation, Bates' order will have been weakened and future presidents will have more wiggle room.

The Bush administration could have taken other steps to avoid a showdown at the appeals court. Even if it appealed Bates' ruling, it could have negotiated a deal with Congress in which Miers and Bolten provided some information voluntarily and lawmakers agreed to withdraw the lawsuit.