In this study, aluminum alloy 7075 (AA7075) nanopowders were prepared by High-Energy Ball Milling (HEBM) in a bath of isopropyl alcohol. The process was investigated in different milling times and silicon carbides (SiC) reinforcement percentual. The effects of these parameters on the samples were characterized by X-ray diffraction (XRD), Laser Diffraction (LD), Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), and Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy (EDS). The XRD analyses showed that as the grinding time increases, the micro deformation also increases, while the crystallite and particle size decrease until a constant value at 480 min. If the percentual of SiC reinforcement increases until 5 percent, there is a minimum change in the results compared to AA 7075 milling 480 min with no reinforcement. On the other hand, when the AA7075 was milled for 480 min and reinforced by 10 percent SiC, the best structural refinement result was achieved.

In this work, composite powders of aluminum alloy 7075 (AA7075) reinforced by 2 weight percent of nanosized particles of silicon carbide (SiC), titanium nitride (TiN), and zinc oxide (ZnO) were produced in a bath of isopropyl alcohol by high energy ball milling during 480 min at 25 ºC, 900 rpm, and Balls-to-Powder Weight Ratio (BPR) of 20:1. The techniques of X-Ray Diffraction (XRD), Laser Diffraction Method (LDM), Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), and microanalysis of Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy (EDS) were used to characterize the powders as received and processed. Then, the composites were hot extruded and characterized by XRD, SEM, and microhardness Vickers (HV). The milling process reduces the crystallite and particle size to around 30 nm and 10 µm, respectively. After extrusion, a fine microstructure and good consolidation were found for all bars, except for AA7075 as received. The ranging microhardness values were from 97 HV to 121 HV.

Abstract Brazil is considered a megadiverse country, but the soil fauna is still very poorly known. The aim of this study was to report, for the first time, the abundance and genus composition of terrestrial enchytraeids (Enchytraeidae, Oligochaeta) in Savanna Tall Woodland (Cerradão) and a pasture in Cerrado Biome and in Upper Montane Atlantic Forest and a grassland in Atlantic Forest Biome. The enchytraeid density in Pasture and Cerradao was 2,036 and 18,844 (204 and 2,094, on average) individuals per square meter, respectively. At the Atlantic forest and Grassland, density was 9,666 and 12,242 individuals per square meter (1,075 and 1,471 on average). About genus composition for the studied areas, Enchytraeus and Hemienchytraeus were found in the four ecosystems evaluated, while Tupidrilus and Fridericia were found only in Cerradão and Atlantic Forest, respectively. Achaeta was absent in Upper Montane Atlantic Forest, but dominant in pasture, while Guaranidrilus was absent in Pasture, but predominant in the other ecosystems.

Abstract: In Brazil, aside from outlining discourses and practices that set pathways for legal institutions, jurists have also traditionally played a central role in politics. Moreover, by openly criticizing public officials and the political system itself, as well as by merging political engagement with professional acting, jurists introduce non-legal, particularistic subjects in the legal system. They may also trade their actions for long-term group benefits. Considering the context and aftermath of Operation Car Wash, it is possible to discern that the jurists’ attitudes toward the law and politics exert impact on the assessment of the legitimacy of the exercise of power expressed in surveys measuring the trust in democracy. Within this framework, we argue that, by presenting themselves as agents of legality while simultaneously violating the law, jurists contribute to the deepening of the political-institutional crisis. Furthermore, we hold that the instrumentalization of legal forms boosts non-democratic uses of law, reinforcing the disintegration of the Brazilian democracy after 2014.

Resumo: No Brasil, além de formularem discursos e práticas que mobilizam instituições jurídicas, juristas possuem, tradicionalmente, lugar destacado na orientação da política, sendo também capazes de (re)inserir conteúdos normativos particularistas no direito ao criticar agentes públicos e o sistema político, bem como ao incorporar suas próprias visões políticas às práticas profissionais, obtendo, nesta relação, benefícios materiais. Considerando a importância das respostas judiciais na avaliação da legitimação do exercício do poder político após a Operação Lava Jato, evidenciada por pesquisas de confiança na democracia, argumenta-se que, ao se apresentarem como agentes da legalidade e simultaneamente violarem o direito, os juristas aprofundaram a crise político-institucional brasileira. Por fim, aduz-se que a instrumentalização das formas jurídicas incentiva usos não democráticos do direito, reforçando a desintegração democrática no pós-2014.

As disputas discursivas sobre a autonomia do Poder Judiciário e seu envolvimento com as demais instituições políticas marcam o sentido de independência judicial como condição da imparcialidade da jurisdição. No entanto, a observação da historicidade da participação de juristas e juízes, em particular dos ministros do STF, na construção do próprio espaço político-institucional ainda ocupa uma reduzida dimensão nas análises de cientistas sociais sobre o acesso à justiça no Brasil. Ao procurar combinar a análise dos influxos do regime ditatorial sobre as funções do Supremo Tribunal Federal no texto constitucional e as manifestações dos ministros sobre seu próprio papel institucional durante a ditadura, este texto traça alguns aspectos históricos relevantes para a compreensão da complexa articulação entre política e direito, na qual foram desenhadas as disputas por autonomia da Suprema Corte no período da ditadura civil-militar no país.

Argumentative disputes regarding the autonomy of the Judicial Power and its engagement with other political institutions mark the notion of judicial independence as a condition for judicial impartiality. It is also important to stress that a historical inquiry concerning the participation of legal experts and judges, in particular Brazilian Supreme Court magistrates, on the process of constructing their own political-institutional space, unfortunately, still occupies a mitigated importance in social scientist’s findings when dealing with the access to justice in Brazil. This paper seeks to combine the analysis of the influxes from the dictatorship period, concerning the Supreme Court’s functions under the Constitutional commands, and the magistrates' declarations about their own institutional role during the dictatorial regime. It also aims to bring some relevant historical aspects to a better understanding of the complex relationship between politics and law, in which disputes for the Supreme Court’s autonomy were drawn in the period of civil-military dictatorship in Brazil.

Les disputes discursives au sujet de l’autonomie du pouvoir judiciaire et son implication auprès des autres institutions politiques marquent le sens de l’indépendance judiciaire en tant que condition de l’impartialité de la juridiction. Néanmoins, l’observation de l’historicité de la participation des juristes et de juges, en particulier les magistrats de la Cour Suprême Brésilienne, dans la construction de leur propre espace politico-institutionnel occupe encore une dimension réduite dans l’analyse des chercheurs en sciences sociales sur l’accès à la justice au Brésil. En essayant de combiner l’analyse des affluences de la dictature sur des fonctions de la Cour suprême dans le texte constitutionnel et les manifestations des magistrats sur leur propre rôle institutionnel pendant la dictature, cet article trace quelques aspects historiques marquants pour comprendre l’articulation complexe entre la politique et le droit, dans laquelle ont été tracées les disputes pour l’autonomie de la Cour dans la période de la dictature civile-militaire au Brésil.

Resumo Comumente, os estudos dedicados à centralização da jurisdição constitucional no Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) adotam, como fundamento, suposta ampliação da segurança jurídica e presumido ganho de eficácia em contexto de crescente demanda do Poder Judiciário. Comparando-se os discursos nos debates legislativos que alteraram o texto constitucional, expandindo os efeitos das decisões do STF, e os dados levantados pela pesquisa “A quem interessa o controle concentrado de constitucionalidade?”, analisou-se, neste artigo, a eficácia do aumento da concentração do controle no STF para a redução da litigiosidade e, consequentemente, da sobrecarga nessa corte. Observou-se que a ampliação dos poderes do STF na adjudicação constitucional, durante os últimos cinquenta anos, não resultou em diminuição da sobrecarga; contudo, as estratégias de seletividade, para reduzir os julgamentos de mérito, foram mais eficazes. Por outro lado, houve a estabilização do número de acórdãos proferidos, fato que refuta o reiterado argumento de inviabilização dos trabalhos do tribunal.

Abstract Usually, studies about the centralization of the constitutional adjudication in the Brazilian Supreme Court adopt as a premise that an increase in legal certainty will lead to a gain in efficiency, in a context of a growing caseload on the Judicial Branch. In this paper, this premise is analyzed based on the comparative assessment of the speeches in law-making processes that changed the constitutional text and the data collected in the research “Who is Interested in the Concentrated System of Judicial Review?”. The article concludes that the increase in the Brazilian Supreme Court’s power to adjudicate the Constitution during the last 50 years did not result in the reduction of the excessive caseload. The methods of selection of cases were more efficient, however. At the same time, the amount of the court’s decisions has been stable. The paper concludes that this fact refutes the reiterated argument that the operation of the Court tends to be unviable.