The trend toward faculty edited law journals is much to be encouraged, so I was pleased to see the announcement for the new American Journal of Law and Equality, with co-editors Martha Minow, Randall Kennedy, and Cass Sunstein. Here is the initial announcement which includes, I think, an unfortunate provision (in my italics):
We announce the launch of a new faculty-edited journal: The American Journal of Law and Equality, which seeks articles from a variety of perspectives that examine legal issues involving equality and discrimination in all their forms. Submissions might address issues involving economic equality, race, gender, disability, religion, political viewpoint, geography, gender identity, sexual orientation, or other categories involving categorization of human beings. Diverse approaches and points of view are welcome, and submissions may draw on history, economics, political philosophy, and more. Submissions should be between 10,000-26,000 words, including footnotes.
Faculty edited journals are, of course, predominant in other fields. Most, if not all, impose strict word limits on submissions. The American Sociological Review, for example, limits articles to 15,000 words. Many other journals impose a 10,000 word limit, and some are even shorter. At BMJ Medical Humanities the limit is 9000 words.
In contrast, the American Journal of Law and Equality states that submissions should be "between 10,000-26,000 words," apparently imposing a minimum at about where many faculty-edited journals in other disciplines set the maximum. Almost everyone I know thinks that law review articles are too long. In my opinion, 10,000 words ought to be sufficient to advance and support an important idea, 15,ooo words is usually more than enough, and 26,000 words is almost always far too long.
It is therefore unfortunate that this much appreciated new journal has missed the opportunity to take a stand for brevity.
NOTE: This post has been corrected thanks to a tip from Tom Gallanis.
Comments