The statement by the American Historical Review's editor regarding changes in editorial practices at the AHR has been getting a ton of attention in the history world. But (maybe unsurprisingly) no attention that I can tell from the legal academic world. I think this is a conversation that law journals should be involved with — and not just on who's being published and who has been published, but about what the journals have published. Like what the Yale Law Journal published in 1921, perhaps?
There's a related conversation to have about entire fields. I've been talking for some time now about the proslavery ideas of one 19th-century legal historian — Thomas R. Dew — and to a lesser extent the eugenics ideas of another legal historian from the early twentieth century, Lothrop Stoddard.