Rapid determination of carbohydrates in heroin drug seizures using capillary electrophoresis with short-end injection

A simple and rapid method for the analysis of carbohydrates in heroin samples by capillary electrophoresis utilizing a borate complexation method is described. Separations were performed using an uncoated fused silica capillary, 50 cm x 50 micro I.D. x 360 microm O.D. with an effective separation length of 9 cm. The system was run at 60 degrees C with an applied voltage of -8 kilovolts. Injection of each sample was for 1 sec at -50 mbar. UV detection was employed with the wavelength set at 195 nm. The background electrolyte consisted of 65 mM borate, pH 12.0. Samples and standards were prepared in the run buffer containing 2 mg/mL of mannose as an internal standard. Under these conditions a test mixture containing glucose, sucrose, lactose, mannitol and mannose as an internal standard was resolved within 5 min. The method was used to determine the concentration of carbohydrates in heroin seizure samples and synthetic heroin samples. The results were in good agreement with the reported values.     

Scrutiny Land: Scrutiny Land is the place where government needs to justify to a court its restrictions on the liberties of the people

Scrutiny Land is the place where government needs to justify to a court its restrictions on the liberties of the people. In the 1930s, the Supreme Court began limiting access to Scrutiny Land. While the New Deal Court merely shifted the burden to those challenging a law to show that a restriction of liberty is irrational, the Warren Court made the presumption of constitutionality effectively irrebuttable. After this, only one road to Scrutiny Land remained: showing that the liberty being restricted was a fundamental right. The Glucksberg Two-Step, however, limited the doctrine of fundamental rights to those (1) narrowly defined liberties that are (2) deeply rooted in tradition and history. In this Article, I explain how the ability to define accurately almost any liberty as broad or narrow improperly gives courts complete discretion to protect liberty or not as it chooses. I then describe an alternative that is suggested by the approach taken by the Court in Lawrence v. Texas: a general presumption of liberty. Not only is such an approach practical, it is also more consistent with the text and original meaning of the Constitution than is the Glucksburg Two-Step.     

Accountability and global governance: The view from paternalism

A standard view is that global governance institutions require strong accountability mechanisms to perform effectively and legitimately. Yet these institutions are much better at preaching than practicing accountability. A standard explanation for this gap references interests. For various reasons, institutions and their creators would rather be less than more accountable, and they are quite content to live with the hypocrisy. This article points to an alternative possibility: the public interest. An article of faith is that modern governance should be staffed by relatively autonomous experts who use their specialized knowledge for the greater good; accordingly, they cannot be accountable to those who are affected by their decisions. Too much democracy, therefore, can be a source of dysfunction. Yet expert authority's virtues also can become vices; namely, insulation from those affected by their decisions can also be a source of dysfunction, most closely associated with the “iron cage.” Although the possibility that expertise is both a virtue (effectiveness) and a vice (dysfunction) is well known in the literature on domestic governance, it has been neglected in discussions of global governance. Indeed, the dangers of, and dysfunctions associated with the iron cage might be greater in global governance than in domestic governance precisely because of the absence of institutional checks that often are produced by a preexisting social contract between the rulers and the ruled. I probe this possibility in the area of humanitarian governance.