US Supreme Court judges closely questioned lawyers representing both sides in the Paula Jones civil case against President Clinton. But the judges gave no indication on what their ruling will be when it is given later this year.
Lawyers for the President argued that the case should be postponed until after his second term expires in the year 2001 as otherwise he would be distracted from his official duties.
Ms Jones's lawyers argued that it would be unfair to her to have to wait another four years to clear her name.
They said that witnesses memories could fade or evidence could be lost by the time the President's term ended.
Outside the Supreme Court building near the Capitol, five members of a group called the Clinton Investigative Commission wore Clinton masks and mocked the President with placards saying "I believe Paula".
Ms Jones, who was not present at the hearing, is seeking $70,000 in damages. She alleges that Mr Clinton, when governor of Arkansas in 1991, had her brought to a hotel room in Little Rock where he made sexual advances to her.
Mr Clinton has denied the allegations but his lawyers say that he is willing to let the case go ahead after his presidency.
Observers tried to guess from the questions of the judges how they were thinking about the case. The judges are not being asked to rule on the charges being made by Ms Jones but on whether a sitting President should have to answer charges on personal conduct.
Justice Antonin Scalia, one of the most conservative judges, said at one stage in yesterday's hearing that the arguments by Mr Clinton's lawyers that a lawsuit would take up too much of the President's time were not "terribly persuasive".
He said that "we see presidents riding horseback, chopping firewood . . . and so forth. The notion that he does not have a minute to spare is not credible."
But Judge Scalia and the other justices also seemed concerned that allowing the Jones case to go ahead now would give a trial judge control over the President's schedule.
The President's lawyer, Mr Robert Bennett, argued that unless there were exceptional circumstances, the President of the US should not be subject to litigation while in office. "He should not be taken away from his constitutional duties. . . We'll give Ms Jones her day in court, but let's not do it now," he said.
Ms Jones's lawyer, Mr Gilbert Davis, told the court that the President had "the same rights and responsibilities as all other citizens" including the duty to answer a lawsuit filed against him.
Later outside the court, another of Ms Jones's lawyers hinted that a settlement was still possible if the President apologised to his client.
The President's lawyers and the White House refused all comment on the case. The White House spokesman, Mr Mike McCurry, indicated that this would remain the position until a ruling is given.