Convicted murderer Heliberto Chi on Thursday became the second foreign national to be put to death in Texas since the International Court of Justice ordered the US to stay such executions. The US Supreme Court refused to grant either a stay or certiorari just hours before the Honduran man was executed at 6 pm local time. Lawyers for the Honduran government have argued that Chi was improperly prevented from contacting his government in violation of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. Last month, lawyers for Mexico made a similar argument before the ICJ to block the execution of Mexican citizen Jose Ernesto Medellin, which took place on Tuesday.

The governor of Texas announced his refusal to comply with the ICJ order last month. In March, the US Supreme Court ruled in Medellin v. Texas that neither a 2005 memorandum from President Bush ordering Texas to rehear several cases against Mexican nationals nor the March 2004 ICJ decision were binding on Texas officials who had refused to rehear Medellin's case. Last year, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals stayed Chi's lethal injection execution while the US Supreme Court considered Baze v. Rees, a case reviewing whether lethal injection is unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment.

Judge Royce Lamberth of the US District Court for the District of Columbia on Wednesday ordered the unsealing of hundreds of documents related to the FBI's probe into the 2001 anthrax attacks. Among other papers, the released documents include 14 search warrants issued against government scientist and biodefense researcher Bruce Ivins, who had recently emerged as a suspect in the mailings. Last week, Ivins apparently committed suicide after learning that the Department of Justice planned to prosecute him in connection with the attacks. Officials close to the investigation said that the documents were first released in briefings made to victims' families and that the investigation into the crime has all but ended.

Earlier this month, the US Department of Justice announced that it will pay former US Army germ-warfare researcher Dr. Steven Hatfill $2.8 million to settle his claim that the DOJ violated the US Privacy Act by providing information about him to journalists during its investigation of the 2001 anthrax attacks, in which he was at one point named a "person of interest." The DOJ initially agreed to seek a settlement in late June after Hatfill filed his lawsuit. The settlement may moot a contempt case against former USA Today reporter and past JURIST student staff member Toni Locy, who is now awaiting a ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Locy had refused to disclose her related sources in discovery, and Hatfill lawyer Christopher Wright later stated that Locy's evidence was no longer needed by his client.

A female high-school football player claims she was discriminated against and suffered a severe injury, because her coach "wanted to show that girls were not tough enough to play football."

The Evansville Community School District and head coach Ron Grovesteen discriminated against Ivyanne Elborough by refusing to give her a permanent jersey, denying her access to a women's locker room to change and forcing her to cut her hair, Elborough and her mother claim in Federal Court.

Elborough had joined the Evansville High School football team as a freshman. She claims the coach posted the practice schedule only in the boys' locker room, where she could not see it. Similarly, she says snacks were served there, preventing Elborough from enjoying them with the rest of the team.

"This had the effect of locating certain aspects of team camaraderie in a place that was inaccessible to Plaintiff Elborough," the lawsuit claims.

Grovesteen, allegedly made Elborough cut her hair "very short" twice, even though boys on the team were permitted to have longer hair styles. She claims Grovesteen told her that "cutting her hair like a boy's was a commitment she needed to be willing to make to play football."

She says Grovesteen refused to unlock the women's locker room so that Elborough could get her safety gear and allowed the plaintiff to practice without it. As a result, Elborough was seriously injured during practice. He was "malicious and willful in failing to prevent injury to Plaintiff Elborough ... because he wanted to deter (her) and future female students from participating on the football team."

Elborough and her mom seek compensation for alleged injuries, medical costs, humiliation, mental and emotional distress, and other damages. They are represented by Jett Scott Olson.

An obese death-row inmate claims his size could hinder the effect of one of the drugs used in lethal injection and will make it difficult for executioners to find his veins.

Richard Wade Cooey II filed a federal lawsuit asking Gov. Ted Strickland to bar his Oct. 14 execution until the state addresses his claims. At 5 feet 7, weighing more than 260 pounds, Cooey says he is too fat to be put to death. He claims the potential problems associated with his weight, including the possibility that the anesthetic will have a minimal effect on him, would render lethal injection a form of cruel and unusual punishment.

Cooey, 41, was sentenced to death for raping and killing two women in 1986.

Verne Troyer, the actor who played "Mini Me" in the Austin Powers movies, wants $20 million from his ex-girlfriend, who allegedly leaked part of their sex tape leaked to gossip Web site TMZ.com before trying to sell the entire tape to the highest bidder.

Troyer says his former girlfriend, Renee Schriber, insisted that the couple make the explicit tape last year. Troyer claims that the tape was only supposed to be for personal use, but last June he heard that a portion of it was playing on the front page of TMZ.

According to the federal complaint, Schriber called Troyer "in tears, expressing her absolute horror that a portion of the videotape was being broadcast on the internet." Schriber said that the tape must have been stolen from the couple's house.

But the story Schriber allegedly told the press was a little different. Schriber gave interviews "to any news agency and television outlet that would listen to her," the lawsuit states, claiming that Troyer had filmed her having sex with him in secret, that she had no idea the tape existed, and did not know how it had gotten into the hands of the public.

Based on Schriber's story, Troyer sued TMZ, and got a temporary restraining order. However, TMZ submitted Schriber's declaration, given under oath and penalty of perjury, admitting that she had filmed the video herself, with her own equipment. Schriber also admitted that she co-owned the copyright to the tape and had given it to TMZ, along with a license to display a clip of the tape. Troyer says Schriber probably leaked the clip as a trailer for the whole tape, which he says she intended to sell all along.

In a sharply worded federal complaint, the Union Pacific Railroad Co. asserts that it is not responsible for the cocaine and marijuana seized on railroad cars as part of a smuggling operation of trains bound for the United States from Mexico.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection found 47 cases of illegal narcotics seized at checkpoints in California, Arizona and Texas. In each case, the Border Patrol found illegal drugs on a train bound for the United States from a Mexican railroad.

Though the trains were ultimately headed to Union Pacific customers, the railroad company claims that it should not have to pay the $37.7 million in proposed penalties against it, because the drugs were found before the railroad cars ever came into Union Pacific's possession.

"At all times prior to the discovery of the illegal narcotics, either the Mexican railroad operating the train of (U.S. Customs and Border Protection) had exclusive control of the trains in which they were found," the plaintiff claims.

It rejects the defendant's assertion that Union Pacific failed to exercise the "highest degree of care and diligence" to ensure drugs were not smuggled on its trains. Union Pacific points out that it owns no railroad facilities in Mexico, and cannot hire, supervise or direct the railroad employees across the border.

The government improperly applied the Tariff Act of 1930 in assessing fines against Union Pacific, the lawsuit claims.

"The Tariff Act does not obligate (Union Pacific) to enter Mexico and conduct extraterrestrial inspections," the railroad claims, "and to do so would require (Union Pacific) to take extraordinarily dangerous and costly measures that the United States itself has found too dangerous and/or futile to undertake."

The risk of setting up security operations in Mexico would expose the plaintiff and its employees "to the risks of murder and mayhem at the hands of Mexican drug cartels, while at the same time potentially running afoul of Mexican law," the lawsuit states.

And it would accomplish nothing, the railroad claims.

"If (U.S. Customs and Border Protection) and the full power of the United States government cannot effectively seize drugs in Mexico, there is no reason to believe that (Union Pacific) could.