The retention vote in which three Iowa Supreme Court justices were ousted was illegal, according to a lawsuit seeking to keep the three justices from being tossed from the bench.

The lawsuit claims the vote violated the Iowa Constitution, which requires judicial retention votes to be held on a separate ballot.

Chief Justice Marsha Ternus and justices Michael Streit and David Baker were voted off following a campaign by groups opposed to the court's unanimous decision to legalize same-sex marriage in Iowa.

The Des Moines Register reported that the lawsuit, filed by attorneys Thomas W. George, John P. Roehrick and Carlton Salmons, asks for a temporary judicial order that would prohibit the judges from leaving the court when their terms expire at the end of December.

Gov. Chris Christie approved a law firm with expertise in federal transit issues to help challenge a $271 million tab the federal government says the state owes for a canceled rail tunnel.

Christie's office said the governor had signed off Thursday on the selection of the Washington, D.C., firm of Patton Boggs. Rodney Slater, who served as U.S. transportation secretary under President Bill Clinton, and former Republican U.S. Sen. Trent Lott are among the partners.

"We're delighted to have been engaged by the state," said Stuart Pape, the firm's managing partner. The firm, which has an office in Newark, is assessing its strategy, Pape said.

Christie killed the $8.7 billion tunnel from New Jersey to New York City on Oct. 27, citing potential cost overruns that he said could add $2 billion to $5 billion or more to the price.

The federal government and Port Authority of New York and New Jersey each contributed $3 billion to the project, while New Jersey's share was $2.7 billion. The state and Port Authority were responsible for overruns.

Christie is fighting a bill for the return of federal money already spent on engineering and construction of the tunnel. The Nov. 24 bill from the Federal Transit Authority seeks payment within 30 days.

"It's not surprising that the same federal transit agency that had no clear way to pay for cost overruns of a project already hurt by poor planning and inequitable cost sharing is relying on bureaucratic power plays to wring even more money out of New Jerseyans," Christie said in a statement Thursday.

A $450 million class action is being launched on behalf of National Australia Bank shareholders who lost money during the global financial crisis because of NAB's exposure to toxic debt.

Legal firm Maurice Blackburn will lodge the claim in a Victorian court tomorrow.

The firm says NAB had bought $1.2 billion in collateralised debt obligations (CDO) in 2006 which had a heavy exposure to the US sub-prime housing market.

It will allege that between early January and late July that year, NAB failed to properly disclose to shareholders all material information relating to its CDO exposure.

It's the ongoing public corruption investigation that's led to charges against numerous city officials, including former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. It now appears his father could soon be at federal court, as well.

"The case looks like it's at a point where decisions have to be made both by the prosecutors and by Mr. Kilpatrick," said Peter Henning, a former federal prosecutor.

This time that Mr. Kilpatrick is Bernard Kilpatrick, the father of the disgraced former mayor.

Kwame Kilpatrick is already facing charges related to raiding the Kilpatrick Civic Fund, but now his father has asked for a federal defender - a sure sign he's in trouble, too.

"A target letter is often viewed as an invitation to someone to make contact with the government and explore the possibility of resolving the case," Henning said.

He said it's not clear what the charges would be against the elder Kilpatrick, who is long suspected of orchestrating pay-to-play deals involving city contracts. However, whatever money he might have made appears to be gone. Bernard Kilpatrick had to sign an affidavit of indigency to qualify for a court appointed attorney.

The Supreme Court is starting its new term with a new justice, Elena Kagan, and bad news for hundreds of parties trying to get their cases heard at the nation's highest court.

The justices are expected to start work Monday by denying many of the nearly 2,000 appeals that piled up in recent months. The court also is hearing argument in a bankruptcy dispute and an appeal by criminal defendants seeking shorter prison terms.

During the new term, the court will look at provocative anti-gay protests at military funerals and a California law banning the sale of violent video games to children. These cases worry free speech advocates, who fear the court could limit First Amendment freedoms.

The funeral protest lawsuit, over signs praising American war deaths, "is one of those cases that tests our commitment to the First Amendment," said Steven Shapiro, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Another case involves a different aspect of the First Amendment, the government's relationship to religion. The justices will decide whether Arizona's income tax credit scholarship program, in essence, directs state money to religious schools in violation of the constitutional separation of church and state.

Under Chief Justice John Roberts, marking his fifth anniversary on the court, and with the replacement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor by Justice Samuel Alito, the court has been more sympathetic to arguments that blur the line between government and religion, as long as one religion is not favored over another.