Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea: Crime Victims\u27 Dilemma after \u3ci\u3eSimon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of the New York Crime Victims Board\u3c/i\u3e, 112 S. Ct. 501 (1991)

In Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of the New York Crime Victims Board, the Supreme Court held that a statute, New York\u27s Son of Sam law, that allowed crime victims to reach the proceeds of their victimizers\u27 media reenactments of the criminals\u27 wrongful acts violated the First Amendment. By invalidating the statute, the Supreme Court eliminated the only presently available means to prevent criminals from profiting from their crimes and exploiting their victims. This Comment examines the origins of this problem and proposes that courts use restitutions common law doctrines to prevent criminals who sell their stories from profiting at the expense of their victims\u27 suffering

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field