Nica-Toeplitz algebras associated with product systems over right LCM semigroups

We prove uniqueness of representations of Nica-Toeplitz algebras associated to product systems of $C^*$-correspondences over right LCM semigroups by applying our previous abstract uniqueness results developed for $C^*$-precategories. Our results provide an interpretation of conditions identified in work of Fowler and Fowler-Raeburn, and apply also to their crossed product twisted by a product system, in the new context of right LCM semigroups, as well as to a new, Doplicher-Roberts type $C^*$-algebra associated to the Nica-Toeplitz algebra. As a derived construction we develop Nica-Toeplitz crossed products by actions with completely positive maps. This provides a unified framework for Nica-Toeplitz semigroup crossed products by endomorphisms and by transfer operators. We illustrate these two classes of examples with semigroup $C^*$-algebras of right and left semidirect products.Comment: Title changed from "Nica-Toeplitz algebras associated with right tensor C*-precategories over right LCM semigroups: part II examples". The manuscript accepted in J. Math. Anal. App

A Called Third Strike: Professional Baseball’s Antitrust Exemption in a Post-Dobbs World

Professional baseball has long enjoyed exemption from federal antitrust law due to a trio of Supreme Court cases. The last of these cases, Flood v. Kuhn, upheld the exemption on the basis of stare decisis, yet rejected the constitutional foundation on which it rested. This Comment argues that in the wake of the recent Supreme Court case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Roberts Court has provided a clear analytical framework for analyzing constitutional stare decisis that should apply to Flood. Applying the Dobbs framework, this Comment then shows how Flood fails every factor favoring continued stare decisis protection and should be overturned

Functional Intimate Association Analysis: A Doctrinal Shift To Save the Roberts Framework

In Roberts v. U.S. Jaycees, the Supreme Court recognized intimate association as one of the two distinct senses of the freedom of association. In doing so, the Court identified two essential functions that justify constitutional protection for the relationships that provide them: intimate relationships cultivate and transmit shared ideals and beliefs, and they provide opportunities for emotional enrichment and self-identification by facilitating the creation of close bonds among members. Then, recognizing that familial relationships often exemplify these functions, the Court identified four aspects of family relationships that would help distinguish intimate from nonintimate associations: size, purpose, selectivity, and seclusion from others. Despite the secondary role of these aspects, subsequent decisions have focused solely on these four characteristics without even mentioning the justifications that originally supported constitutional protection. This factor-based analysis has resulted in unpredictable and inconsistent decisions that threaten to undermine the legitimacy of the entire Roberts framework. Drawing from the original functional justifications, this Note argues that courts must abandon their sole reliance on the Roberts factors and instead adopt a functional analysis that properly appreciates the right’s underlying values and ensures that groups reflecting those values are consistently protected

Applying a Multidimensional Strategy to Mitigate Lateral Violence in a Small Rural Community Hospital in Western New York

Providing registered nurses with education and strategies to mitigate lateral violence is an evidenced-based method for creating a culture of civility. A descriptive pilot study with registered nurses was conducted on two medical/surgical units at a small rural community hospital. Strategies included a review of organizational policies, a one-day educational retreat for unit managers and registered nurse champions, and an online educational toolkit on lateral violence for the staff nurses on the pilot units

Process-independent effective coupling. From QCD Green's functions to phenomenology

This article reports on a very recent proposal for a new type of process-independent QCD effective charge [Phys.Rev.D96(2017)054026] defined, as an anologue of the Gell-Mann-Low effective charge in QCD, on the ground of nothing but the knowledge of the gauge-field two-point Green's function, albeit modified within a particular computational framework; namely, the combination of pinch technique and background field method which makes possible a systematic rearranging of classes of diagrams in order to redefine the Green's function and have them obey linear QED-like Slavnov-Taylor identities. We have here calculated that effective charge, shown how strikingly well it compares to a process-dependent effective charge based on the Bjorken sum rule; and, finally, employed it in an exploratory calculation of the proton electromagnetic form factor in the hard scattering regime.Comment: 13 pages, 3 figues; contribution to NStar 2017 (Columbia, USA

On Investment Law and Questions of Change

This article analyses the various ways in which investment law raises questions of change. It distinguishes between changes in international investment norms, and changes in a host state’s regulatory system which is subject to the control of such norms, and explains how these different manifestations of change relate to the distinct yet interrelated issues of interpretation and application. The article explains why, given features of the contemporary investment regime, on questions of interpretation, concerning the content of international investment norms, arbitrators operate within wider processes of law-development over which states, as treaty masters, also exercise significant influence. In contrast, arbitrators dominate the process of applying international investment norms to particular investor-state disputes to determine whether changes in a host state’s regulatory system breach applicable investment norms. This claim is demonstrated in relation to the two most prominent investment treaty standards: fair and equitable treatment, and the protection against indirect expropriation

Dead Again: The Latest Demise of the Confrontation Clause

In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court abandoned its Roberts “reliability” approach to the right of confrontation. The Court conceded that the Roberts decision had killed the Confrontation Clause by: (1) impermissibly tying the right of confrontation to the rule against hearsay; (2) inappropriately allowing pretrial determinations of reliability to replace actual cross-examination at trial; (3) relying too heavily on malleable, multi-factor balancing tests; and (4) completely failing to constrain judicial discretion. Since Crawford, however, the Court has decided Davis v. Washington and Michigan v. Bryant. Unfortunately, in the course of deciding those cases the Court has once again killed the Confrontation Clause. More specifically, the Court has developed yet another framework that incorporates every single one of Roberts’s flaws, including its failure to constrain judicial discretion. This Essay exposes the underlying reasons for the Court’s failure, offers a solution to the problem, and provides suggestions for the Court when deciding future cases that involve the constitutional rights of criminal defendants