Drafting a composite indicator of validity for regulatory models and legal systems

The aim of this paper is to lay the groundwork for the creation of a composite indicator of the validity of regulatory systems. The composite nature of the indicator implies a) that its construction is embedded in the long-standing theoretical debate and framework of legal validity; b) that it formally contains other sub-indicators whose occurrence is essential to the determination of validity. The paper suggests, in other words, that validity is a second-degree property, i.e., one that occurs only once the justice, efficiency, effectiveness, and enforceability of the system have been checked

The Effect of Osmolytes on Protein Fibrillation

Osmolytes are small molecules that are exploited by cells as a protective system against stress conditions. They favour compact protein states which makes them stabilize globular proteins in vitro and promote folding. Conversely, this preference for compact states promotes aggregation of unstructured proteins. Here we combine a brief review of the effect of osmolytes on protein fibrillation with a report of the effect of osmolytes on the unstructured peptide hormone glucagon. Our results show that osmolytes either accelerate the fibrillation kinetics or leave them unaffected, with the exception of the osmolyte taurine. Furthermore, the osmolytes that affected the shape of the fibrillation time profile led to fibrils with different structure as revealed by CD. The structural changes induced by Pro, Ser and choline-O-sulfate could be due to specific osmolytes binding to the peptides, stabilizing an otherwise labile fibrillation intermediate

Balancing, Proportionality, and Constitutional Rights

In the theory and practice of constitutional adjudication, proportionality review plays a crucial role. At a theoretical level, it lies at core of the debate on rights adjudication; in judicial practice, it is a widespread decision-making model characterizing the action of constitutional, supra-national and international courts. Despite its circulation and centrality in contemporary legal discourse, proportionality in rights-adjudication is still extremely controversial. It raises normative questions—concerning its justification and limits—and descriptive questions—regarding its nature and distinctive features. The chapter addresses both orders of questions. Part I centres on the justification of proportionality review, the connection between proportionality, balancing and theories of rights and the critical aspects of this connection. Part II identifies and analyses the different forms of proportionality both in review, as a template for rights-adjudication, and of review, as a way of defining the scope and limits of adjudication

The constitution of the conflict of laws

Private international law doctrines are often portrayed as natural, largely immutable, boundaries on local public agency in a transnational private world. Challenging this problematic conception requires a reimagining of the field, not only as a species of public law or an instrument of governance, but as a constitutional phenomenon. This paper investigates what such a ‘constitution of the conflict of laws’ could look like. Two features are given special emphasis. First: the idea of the conflict of laws as an independent source of constitutionalist normativity, rather than as a mere passive receptacle for constraints imposed by classical, liberal, constitutional law. And second: the possibility of a local, ‘outward-looking’ form of conflicts constitutionalism to complement more familiar, inwardly focused, federalist conceptions