Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Gun free schoolzones | Main | Commentary on new Texas law »

Tips for those writing law review articles

Posted by David Hardy · 13 September 2005 03:03 PM

Gene Volokh has started an interesting thread, where he asks for comments from law review editors on their process for screening articles. Comments so far are mostly from primary journals at the top 25 or so schools. They give some very interesting insights (which are totally outside my experience, which came at editing a law review 30 yrs ago, when there were many fewer submissions). Essentially:

Some of these places are getting 80 articles a day, others about 80 a week; initial screening is more like a quick skim.

The cover letter is thus VERY important, followed by the beginning of the article.

Turnaround is much quicker than in my day, usually a few weeks. If you submit to several reviews, and get an acceptance from one, you can go to others that you rank more highly, asked for expedited review, and get it in a few days.

The majority (and these are top reviews, mind you) get immediately chucked because they're terribly written, merely recite authority without adding analysis, are by law students, or are re-hashes of past articles by the same author with few, if any, changes.

Not that it'd matter to me, but it helps to have a big name. The smart reviews spot ones by well-known authors and review them immediately, in hopes of pumping out an acceptance before the other reviews can examine it and accept.

· contemporary issues

1 Comment

C.A.G. | September 14, 2005 5:42 PM

Being on law review at a lower ranked law school is different. The law review I edit for is ranked around 125 in the law review citation rankings. I think we are one spot ahead of the "Harvard Environmental Law Review." With a less prestigious review, articles are harder to come by, and thus are more likely to be poorly written.
I have come to the conclusion that if you really want to write a law review article, you can be published.
C.A.G.