Both sides of Milwaukee's sick leave ordinance say they're confident they will prevail now that the lawsuit over the ordinance is heading to a state appeals court.

The state Supreme Court deadlocked 3-3 today on whether to uphold a circuit court ruling overturning the ordinance and sent the case to the appeals court for review.

In June 2009, a Milwaukee County judge struck down the ordinance, which was approved by 70 percent of voters. He found the ballot question didn't contain enough information explaining the ordinance, including details such as how much sick leave employers would be required to provide and when the leave could be used. The appeals court asked the justices to take the case directly, saying it was a matter of first impression.

Justices Michael Gableman, David Prosser and Pat Roggensack voted to uphold the lower court ruling tossing the ordinance, while Justices Shirley Abrahamson, Ann Walsh Bradley and Pat Crooks voted to overturn the decision. Justice Annette Ziegler did not participate in the case.
Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce (MMAC) president Tim Sheehy said he was pleased the injunction blocking implementation of the ordinance remains in place.

"While we would have preferred a decision from the Supreme Court, we remain confident in our position that this mandate is in violation of both federal and Wisconsin statutes and the Wisconsin Constitution," he said. "We look forward to making that case persuasively to the Court of Appeals, keeping the injunction in place, and having the threat of this costly burden on Milwaukee employers lifted once and for all.”
The Wisconsin director of 9to5, National Association of Working Women said the group remained confident in its case as it heads back to the appeals court.

"Seventy percent of local voters approved one of the nation’s first paid sick leave ordinances, and now cities and states around the country are pursuing similar policies," Amy Stear said in a statement from the group that led the charge for the 2008 ballot initiative. "We’re confident in our legal case and look forward to the long overdue implementation of the ordinance."

A federal appeals court has rejected a Dallas-area parent's bid to have "under God" removed from the Texas pledge of allegiance that is recited every day by public schoolchildren.

Attorney General Greg Abbott says Wednesday's ruling is a victory for the constitutionally protected rights and freedoms of all Texans.

The words "under God" were added to the pledge in 2007.

U.S. District Judge Ed Kinkeade ruled in 2009 that the Texas pledge can reference God because several other state pledges and the national pledge reference God or divine grace.

On Wednesday, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed.

David Croft had sued, arguing that the words are unconstitutional and violate the separation of church and state.

The watchdog of the Securities and Exchange Commission has found no hard evidence that the SEC timed the announcement of its fraud case against Goldman Sachs to eclipse negative news about a separate case.

Inspector General David Kotz's report Wednesday was a response to demands from congressional Republicans who had questioned the timing of the Goldman charges. The SEC announced the charges on April 16, the same day it released Kotz's blistering report on the agency's failure to catch R. Allen Stanford's alleged Ponzi scheme.

But the report says that the way the SEC managed the Goldman case showed it was trying to maximize positive press coverage. Kotz's report says the agency didn't want a congressional panel to break the news first.

Kotz found that the SEC's timing of its Goldman announcement was delayed a day so as not to overshadow its announcement of a settlement with investment firm Quadrangle Group. He said the SEC wanted to maintain a positive relationship with New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who was announcing his own settlement with Quadrangle that day

Kotz's investigation also found no evidence that SEC officials coordinated the timing of actions on Goldman with anyone in the Obama administration or Congress to help speed passage of the financial overhaul law.

In his investigation of the agency's handling of the Stanford case, Kotz found that SEC staff had known since 1997 that the billionaire was likely operating a Ponzi scheme but didn't charge him until February 2009. The charges came a few months after the Bernard Madoff pyramid surfaced.

At a Senate hearing last month, Kotz had termed "suspicious" the timing of the agency's civil fraud charges against Goldman.

The Supreme Court won't reconsider a decision to reinstate more than 100 lawsuits filed by women who claimed that hormone replacement therapy caused breast cancer.

The high court refused on Tuesday to hear an appeal from Wyeth LLC and other pharmaceutical companies.

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a federal judge's decision to throw out many of the lawsuits.

The drug companies wanted the case in federal court, and said plaintiffs added unrelated local defendants to ensure it would stay in state court. A federal judge agreed, and dismissed many of the lawsuits. But the appeal court overturned that ruling, saying that it had not been proven that the women had done anything wrong.

A member of the pop group Girlicious has pleaded guilty to felony cocaine possession and has received a deferred judgment that could result in the charge being dismissed.

Los Angeles district attorney's spokeswoman Jane Robison says Natalie Mejia entered the plea Wednesday in a Pasadena courtroom.

A trial on a charge of possession with the intent to sell had been scheduled for this week. Mejia was arrested on March 9 in Glendale, Calif., after police said they found 13 bags of cocaine in her Gucci purse during a traffic stop.

Robison says Mejia will be required to undergo counseling and attend classes for the next 18 months.

If she completes the deferred judgment program, the felony charge will be dismissed.

The attorney for the man accused of opening fire at Fort Hood has blocked a military-ordered mental exam for his client.

John Galligan is the lead defense attorney for Maj. Nidal Hasan (nih-DAHL' hah-SAHN'). He said he gave written objections Thursday to the three-member board of military mental health professionals who will determine whether Hasan is competent to stand trial.

The panel also will determine Hasan's mental status the day of the Nov. 5 shooting that left 13 dead and nearly three dozen wounded on the Texas Army post.

Galligan said he and the panel went inside the jail to see Hasan, who signed a document saying he did not want to be evaluated at this time. Galligan said the panel also signed the document and left.