NORRISTOWN Judges said Monday that they plan to rule promptly after hearing lawyers for Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane argue why she should not be tried for contempt of court for firing a prosecutor who testified in a leak investigation into her office.

The hourlong session was in Montgomery County before Judge William Carpenter and two other judges. Among other things, Kane's lawyers want Carpenter to remove himself from the case, saying he is biased against Kane after ordering and supervising a grand jury investigation last year into allegations that the attorney general's office leaked secret materials to a newspaper.Kane's lawyers also argue that the firing of prosecutor James Barker had nothing to do with retaliation and that a Carpenter order issued last year protecting witnesses in the investigation from retaliation had expired.They repeated Kane's contention that Barker's firing had to do with improving the way the office operates."You shouldn't have to go to court to get permission to do that," Gerald Shargel, a lawyer for Kane, told reporters after the hearing.A court-appointed special prosecutor is prepared to argue that Kane fired Barker in retaliation for testifying. An assistant special prosecutor, John I. McMahon, told reporters after the hearing that he expects the judges will reject Kane's objections because they lack merit.Barker, who was fired April 8, was one of the current or former office employees who testified in the court-ordered investigation into allegations that Kane's office gave investigative information to a newspaper last year that should have been kept secret.Barker has declined to discuss his grand jury testimony. Barker was abruptly fired after six years at the attorney general's office, where he was in charge of the office's criminal appeals cases and grand juries. Barker said he had had no disciplinary issues during his time in the office and was given no reason for his firing.A contempt conviction can result in jail time, but not likely more than six months, and would trigger a disciplinary process that could endanger a lawyer's law license. In Kane's circumstances, the loss of her license would render her unqualified to hold the office.The state Supreme Court in January unsealed the grand jury's recommendation that Kane be charged with criminal contempt, perjury, obstruction, false swearing and official oppression stemming from allegations in the leak investigation. Its written report has not been disclosed publicly, although Shargel said Monday that he wants the report and other grand jury materials released publicly.Montgomery County District Attorney Risa Vetri Ferman is looking into its findings. Kane has not been charged with any crime and has maintained that she is not guilty of leaking secret information.Kane's office has said Barker's firing came amid a restructuring of his unit, and cited his "supervisory accountability" amid news reports on grand jury proceedings that were supposed to have been kept secret. The office has not singled out any particular news reports.