HARRISBURG (AP) - Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane argued to the state's highest court Friday that suspending her law license while she fights criminal charges would violate her constitutional right to due process.

Her lawyers filed a 107-page response to the Supreme Court, the first public confirmation the justices last week ordered her to respond to a petition by Pennsylvania's legal ethics lawyers for an emergency suspension of her license. The document also sheds light on elements of Kane's legal strategy in her criminal case.Kane was charged Aug. 6 by Montgomery County authorities with perjury, obstruction and other offenses based on allegations she leaked secret grand jury information to a newspaper and lied about her actions.Kane's lawyers rejected the allegations against her as untrue and said there was no proof her continued practice of law would cause harm. They argued that suspending her license would circumvent explicit constitutional provisions for removing her from office and violate her right to due process of law."The central facts of this case are in dispute, and due process demands more than mere allegations set forth in a petition before Attorney General Kane's right to pursue her profession could be curtailed," her lawyers wrote. They asked for "a hearing before an impartial fact finder."The Pennsylvania Constitution requires the attorney general to be a licensed lawyer, and court officials have said that suspending her law license would not remove her from office because they do not have the power to remove her.Kane, the first woman and first Democrat elected as the state's attorney general, was sworn in nearly three years ago.Her term expires in January 2017.If her license is suspended, it could lead to a legal fight over her status as the state's top law enforcement officer. Even with a suspended law license, Kane potentially could exert influence over the office. For instance, she might be able hire and fire and retain the perk of traveling with a security detail.Kane's attorneys said it is "far from clear" that an emergency suspension of her license would automatically result in her removal from office. The petition, however, attempts to remove Kane through a disciplinary proceeding, they wrote.They disclosed that the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, in its petition against Kane, claimed that public confidence and trust in her continued practice of law has been "totally eroded," citing calls for her to resign by Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf, other elected state officials and "the electorate."The disciplinary petition, beyond the excerpts in Kane's new filing, has not been made public."How the Office of Disciplinary Counsel can purport to speak for the 'electorate' - which expresses itself only in the voting booth, which last did so when it elected Attorney General Kane, and whose decision will be nullified if she is removed from office by suspension - is a mystery," her lawyers said.They said the heart of the petition is a claim Kane "authorized or directed disclosure" to a reporter of a transcript made last year by her underlings that described the findings of a secret grand jury investigation, conducted before Kane took office. That allegation is also central to the criminal case against her.But Kane did not disclose grand jury material or information kept secret under state criminal records laws, her lawyers wrote.Instead, they said, she only authorized the release of information "relating to a pattern of unjustifiable selective prosecution or nonprosecution" under her predecessors.As part of their filing, her lawyers said previous statements by her attorneys that she authorized the transcript's release were incorrect.