Apparently the Iowa Supreme Court is going to reconsider its most discussed case in recent memory, the so-called irresistible attraction case involving a dental assistant who was fired for being too pretty. As you may recall, the assistant's boss, the dentist, determined that she was too attractive after his wife, who also worked in the practice (there's a lesson here, gents) found sexually provocative messages on her husband's computer from the assistant. The assistant sued for gender discrimination, and the Supreme Court found, unanimously and reasonably I might add, that terminating an employee based on her attractiveness was not discrimination or harassment based on gender.
The Court is hearing this with no additional oral argument and will basically be rehashing its original arguments with no input from the lawyers or anyone else. The general consensus is that the decision will remain the same, but that one or more of the Justices will file a dissenting opinion in time for upcoming elections. Nice to know people aren't going too far with that whole impartiality thing.