The Faculty Lounge

South Dakota Law Review Symposium Call for Papers

USD Law Review will be hosting a Symposium on Cybersecurity and Agricultural Law this coming Spring. Abstracts are due 8/23/22. More info. here: Download South Dakota Law Review - CFP 2022

Ketanji Brown on Prevention versus Punishment

Ketanji Brown Jackson, Prevention versus Punishment: Towards a Principled Distinction in the Restraint of Released Sex Offenders, 109 Harvard Law Review in May 1996 at 1711-28.

CFP: Jaharis Health Law Symposium

The DePaul Journal of Health Care Law, Mary and Michael Jaharis Health Law Institute, and Center for Intellectual Property Law & Information Technology (CIPLIT®) are excited to announce a Call for Papers in connection with the 2022 Jaharis Health Law Symposium.

This year’s topic, “Antitrust and Access to Care: Lessons from Market Consolidation and a Public Health Crisis,” will explore how consolidation across health care markets has impacted access to care. Prominent legal scholars, antitrust enforcers and expert practitioners will address a range of questions through four separate panels focusing on health insurance, pharmaceutical, hospital and digital health markets.

Three papers will be selected from the submissions. Each selected author will receive a $500 honorarium and their article (of approximately 10,000 words) will be published in the Symposium issue of the DePaul Journal of Health Care Law. Full article drafts will be due by June 1, 2022.

We are open to a wide range of topics consistent with the Symposium theme but are particularly interested in papers from scholars with diverse experiences and backgrounds researching health insurance or pharmaceutical markets, as well as papers from junior scholars.

The Symposium will be held both in-person and remotely at DePaul College of Law in Chicago on March 10, 2022. Presenters able to appear in person will receive reimbursement for reasonable travel expenses.

Please submit an abstract of no more than 500 words to asetrini@depaul.edu by January 15, 2022, with the subject line “Jaharis Symposium: Call for Papers.” You also may submit an optional statement of no more than 500 words describing how your selection would enhance the diversity of the Symposium.

CFP: Oklahoma Law Review Remembers Tax Prof Jon Forman

This just in:

The Oklahoma Law Review is accepting tax-themed submissions for publication in our upcoming Spring 2022 issue. This issue will honor the late Professor Jonathan Forman, a beloved faculty member who taught tax courses at the University of Oklahoma College of Law from 1985 to 2021. Please submit manuscripts for consideration to Tina Cannon at TinaCannon@ou.edu before January 7, 2022. Submissions should be a minimum of 5,000 words, and citations should follow The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation(21st edition, 2020). For additional formatting requirements, please visit https://www.law.ou.edu/faculty-and-scholarship/journals/oklahoma-law-review/writers-guidelines.”

Slavery and the History of Federal Powers

Revisionist scholars like Jack Balkin and Richard Primus argue that expansive federal powers are consistent with the principles of the Founding, the views of the early Congress, and/or Marshall Court decisions like McCulloch.  In a forthcoming article, I argue that this scholarship ignores slavery’s profound influence on the Constitution. Before the Civil War, virtually everyone agreed that Congress had no power to interfere with slavery in existing states. Because slavery was fundamental to the political, social, and economic order of the South, this national consensus on slavery dictated that Congress’s powers were extraordinarily narrow by today’s standards.

Of course, slavery’s influence on federal powers is well-known and widely accepted among historians.  My article seeks to “move the ball” by connecting this historical scholarship to the revisionist work of Balkin, Primus, and others. Although I am sure that they are well versed in history, this only makes their lack of any serious engagement with slavery so difficult to understand. (For example, in five articles on the topic, Primus’s most in-depth consideration is found in his most recent essay, which has only 3 pages of discussion). I hope my article encourages them to give more serious consideration to slavery’s influence moving forward.  As the current debates over teaching critical race theory have made clear, we must acknowledge and understand the implications of racism in the law in order to fight against it.  In fact, I argue that slavery’s influence on the historical understanding of federal powers provides a strong reason to reject any theory of interpretation that makes history dispositive of constitutional meaning (including Balkin’s Living Originalism, at least with respect to powers).

My article also engages with the work of David Schwartz, who, unlike Balkin and Primus, does seriously engage with slavery while still arguing that history supports expansive federal powers. In my opinion, however, he does so only by underestimating slavery’s influence.  In sum, Schwartz seems to suggest that, at least for the early Congress and Marshall Court, slavery was an exception to otherwise broad federal powers. His argument, however, gets it exactly backwards. Slavery did not operate as an external constraint on otherwise broad federal power. Instead, slavery was a powerful motivation for the antebellum consensus that all federal powers were limited in scope. This distinction matters, and we do a disservice to history by minimizing slavery’s pervasive influence on constitutional history. Only by fully acknowledging slavery's role can we  build the best case for the type of living constitution that would allow for meaningful change in the Supreme Court's federalism doctrine.

Marquette University Law Review: Expedited Submission Period

UPDATE AUGUST 8, 2021:

We have filled our Winter issue and will now only consider articles for our spring and summer issues.  If you have recently submitted an article and do not want to be considered for those issues please let us know at marquette.law.review@gmail.com.

 

From an email message that I received recently:

The Marquette University Law Review seeks additional articles for its Winter issue. We will consider submissions beginning immediately and will conclude the process on August 20, 2021 at 11:59 PM CT. For any article submitted by August 20, 2021 in accordance with the instructions outlined below, the Marquette University Law Review guarantees a final publication decision within 48 hours of submission. As a condition of submission, authors agree to accept a binding publication offer, should one be extended. The editing process for the Winter issue will commence on September 4. Interested authors may submit articles via email to marquette.law.review@gmail.com to be considered in this expedited submission process. Authors should also submit (1) their name, article title, word count, phone number, and email address in the body of the email and (2) a CV or résumé. Please use “Expedited Submission Process” in the email subject line. We will also be reviewing submissions for later issues through the usual process. Questions may be directed to Jennifer Knackert, editor-in-chief, at Jennifer.knackert@marquette.edu.

South Dakota Law Review Hosting Symposium on Marijuana-Related Legal Issues

The South Dakota Law Review is seeking proposals from those who would like to write and present on legal issues relating to marijuana. Abstracts are due on July 1, and the symposium will be held via Zoom on Monday, Oct. 25. More information is attached here:  Download South Dakota Law Review - CFP. 

Detroit Mercy Law Review: Symposium Announcement

From an email message that I received earlier today:

2021 Detroit Mercy Law Review Symposium

Pandemic: From Disparity to Equity

Call for Proposals

Deadline: October 12, 2020

The Detroit Mercy Law Review at the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law invites proposals for its 105th annual symposium, which will be held March 5, 2021. This year’s topic is Pandemic: From Disparity to Equity, focusing on disparities arising from the current COVID19 pandemic and working from those toward an equitable new normal.

Possible topics include, but are not limited to, the role of law and regulation in light of the pandemic’s disparate impacts across race and class; the impact of pre-pandemic healthcare inequities in underserved communities; effects of the pandemic on education; managing prison release programs during pandemic; housing policy and eviction protections during and after pandemic; legal flexibility and fundamental rights within pandemic “hotspots”; and any other topic related to the law’s response to COVID-19’s effects across race and class. Quality articles based on presentations made at the Symposium will be published in our annual Symposium edition.

Current plans call for the Symposium to take place entirely online. In lieu of our usual reimbursement for travel expenses, presenters will be provided a $500 honorarium.

Submission Procedure

Proposals should be approximately 250–500 words, double-spaced, and must be submitted by email no later than 5 p.m. EST October 12, 2020. Please submit proposals by e-mail to Marta Mazur, Symposium Director, at lawreview@udmercy.edu. In your e-mail, please indicate whether your proposal is for a presentation only or if you plan to submit an article based on your presentation. Acceptances will be e-mailed on or before November 2, 2020. Preference for presentation times will be given to those also planning to submit an article for publication. Articles will be due to the Law Review on Friday, March 12, 2021.

Summer 2019 Exclusive Submission Track at Florida State Law Review

This just in from FSU:

The Florida State University Law Review is delighted to open an exclusive submission track for Summer 2019. Authors who submit to the exclusive submission track agree to accept a binding publication offer, should one be extended. Authors agree to withhold submitting their manuscripts to any other journal until a decision has been made. The exclusive submission track will open from May 27^th to June 16^th and decisions will be rendered by June 23. Accepted manuscripts will be published in Volume 47 of the Law Review. Final manuscripts will be due November 15^th for Issues 3 and 4. Articles selected for Issues 3 and 4 are expected to be published in August 2020.

The Florida State University Law Review accepts manuscripts from all areas of legal scholarship. Manuscripts should closely conform to The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation (20th ed.). Authors interested in submitting to the exclusive submission track for Summer 2019 should email their CV and manuscript as a Word Document or PDF to Executive Article Selection Editor, Jemma Takx, at jat13h@my.fsu.edu.

Creighton Law Review Seeks Article

From students at the Creighton Law Review:

The Creighton Law Review at Creighton University School of Law is currently looking for a lead article for its third edition. The editors would be willing to consider a shorter article and/or essay. Editing on the piece would start in early February.

If anyone has a piece that is substantially complete that they would consider placing with Creighton Law Review, please contact the Board directly at NatalieWilliam at creighton dot edu.

UC Irvine Law Review Moving to Submission Format

The news in the law review world these days is the UC Irvine Law Review, which has been operating on an symposium format, is moving to open submissions.  Their website has more information on this.

Michigan Law Review Elects First African American EIC

The Detroit Free Press has the news that Megan Brown has just been elected editor in chief of the Michigan Law Review.  Ms. Brown is the MLR’s first African American EIC.

And in related news I guess that means it’s time to submit articles. Ladies and gentlemen, start your word processors.

Intellectual Property Scholarship Redux Conference: UNH School of Law

From our friends at the UNH School of Law (and one of the more interesting ideas I've seen for an intellectual property scholars' conference recently) ....

===========

CALL FOR PRESENTATION PROPOSALS AND PAPERS: THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SCHOLARSHIP REDUX CONFERENCE @ the University of New Hampshire School of Law on Friday, April 6 and Saturday, April 7, 2018.  

 

Any intellectual property scholar who has published a significant work of intellectual property law scholarship three or more years ago in a law review is invited to revisit this article at the Intellectual Property Scholarship Redux Conference!  Pick a scholarly work you are very proud of, and convince conference participants that you were prescient!  Or choose one you wish you’d written differently, and explain to conference participants where you went wrong.  Did your piece get cited a lot? Were those citations positive? What response did the article get from law professor colleagues, and why?  Have circumstances changed since your original publication that alters the way you analyze the problem? Did a judge “borrow” your analysis?  We think this will be a really interesting conference.  Help us make sure that it is! 

 

We also invite you to submit a related short essay (10,000 words maximum) for publication consideration by IDEA: The Journal of the Franklin Pierce Center For Intellectual Property.  We will need an edit-ready draft by June 15, 2018.   Preference will be given to presentation proposals that include a related essay, which gives participating legal scholars a great opportunity to cite themselves repeatedly without shame!

 

The deadline for submitting Presentation Proposals is January 31, 2018.  Selected Proposals will be announced shortly thereafter.

 

All proposals to present (and any questions you have) should be emailed to Ann.Bartow@law.unh.edu and lauri.connolly@law.unh.edu   

 

Reimbursement of reasonable travel and lodging expenses is available for intellectual property law scholars whose presentation proposals are accepted.  And we always have great food at our conferences!  We look forward to welcoming you to the University of New Hampshire School of Law in beautiful Concord, New Hampshire in April!

============

Exclusive Submission at Penn State Law Review Until May 12

From students at Penn State:

The Penn State Law Review is conducting a direct article review to fill positions in Volume 122: Issue 1 and 2. Any article submitted to this review between now and May 12th will be considered and evaluated by May 17th. If you have submitted an article to the Penn State Law Review previously, you must resubmit your article for consideration in this direct review.

By submitting your article, you agree to accept an offer for publication, should one be extended. Any articles accepted will be published in Volume 122: Issue 1 or Issue 2 of this review. Issue 1 is currently scheduled for publication in September 2017.

If you have an article that you would like to submit, please e-mail an attached copy of the article, along with your CV, to SBL5219@psu.edu. Please include “2017 Direct Article Review” in the subject line.

Review of The Other Slavery: The Uncovered Story of Indian Enslavement in America

I had the honor of being able to review The Other Slavery: The Uncovered Story of Indian Enslavement in America, written by UC Davis historian, Andrés Reséndez, for JOTWELL: Equality this past April.  The book provides an encyclopedic account of Indian slavery--including the modified forms of it that were used to get around anti-slavery laws—in the Spanish New World from Columbus up to the twentieth century.  I highly recommend this book, which is an impressive feat of legal history.  It is not an easy read by any means, either emotionally or stylistically (due to its density), but it is well worth it. 

The Requerimiento, the document early Spanish invaders recited to the indigenous peoples in Spanish upon coming into the vicinity of their settlements, itself threatens enslavement if the listener does not immediately accept the Pope and the Spanish monarchs.  However, despite teaching the document and its use in my Federal Indian Law courses,  I was still ignorant of the scope of enslavement of indigenous peoples in the New World until reading this book.  I had gained some additional exposure to the issues when researching my legal history law review article on perceptions of tribal savagery and the resulting legal restrictions on tribal self-defense, “Hostile Indian Tribes . . . Outlaws, Wolves… Bears…Grizzlies and Things Like That?” How the Second Amendment and Supreme Court Precedent Target Tribal Self-Defense.  There I had come across references to Native slavery, including an 1827 Virginia case that quoted a 1711 Virginia law under which captured Indians, if deemed to be at war with the colony, were to be taken to the West Indies and sold as slaves.  Gregory v. Baugh, 25 Va. 611, 633-34 (1827).  Despite the direct references to slavery in the Requerimiento and in cases like the aforementioned Gregory v. Baugh, I was in denial about the scope of the practice of Native enslavement until reading The Other Slavery.  Since I researched Hostile Indian Tribes in 2010, there has been other important work on Native enslavement, but the temporal breadth combined with the geographic scope of The Other Slavery make it unique.  Unless you’re already an expert on these issues, I can guarantee you that you’ll never look at Columbus the same way again.     

Hastings Law Journal Guaranteed Article Review

This just in from the Executive Editor of the Hastings Law Journal:

The Hastings Law Journal can guarantee that we will review manuscripts for authors who commit to accepting an offer from Hastings Law Journal if we extend one by 5:00 PM PST on Monday, April 10. If you would like to participate in this process, which does require that you keep your article available until April 10, please submit a Scholastica expedite request clearly indicating that you would like to participate no later than 5:00 PM PST on Friday, March 31. This will ensure that we have enough time to put each article through our peer review process. 

FSU Law Review Exclusive Review

The Florida State University Law Review will be conducting exclusive article reviews over the next few weeks. Any article submitted to the Law Review between now and June 15th will be evaluated for publication purposes by June 22nd.  By submitting an article the author agrees to immediately accept a publication offer with the Review should one be extended.  The author is not required to withdraw any article previously or contemporaneously submitted for consideration elsewhere.  However, the author may not accept an offer of publication from another journal  for any article submitted to the Law Review’s exclusive review process unless the Review indicates that the submitted article will not receive a publication offer. Author requests to further expedite the exclusive review process will be accommodated to the extent practicable. Any articles accepted through this exclusive review process will be published in the Review's third and fourth issues, which are slated for publication in summer of 2017.  

If you have an article you would like to submit, please e-mail Jazz Tomassetti a copy of the article and your CV at  jazztomassetti@gmail.com with the subject line "Exclusive Article Review." We look forward to reading your submissions.

Law Journals and Social Media Presence

My friend Chris Walker, who teaches at Ohio State--and is a fellow laborer in the probate vineyards--, yesterday posed a question on twitter: "Has anyone posted tips on how law reviews can improve their twitter/SM presence?"  He directed it at several people, including @facloungeblog. I must confess I haven't given that much thought -- or really any thought.  But I'm guessing that some readers will have some ideas.  

I look forward to your thoughts; please keep your comments focused on the question.

American Journal of Legal History

I am pleased to announce that Stefan Vogenauer of the Max Planck Institute and I are starting co-editing the American Journal of Legal History.  Roman Hoyos of Southwestern Law is book reviews editor.  Recently Oxford University Press acquired the journal from Temple Law School, which has published it since it was started in the late 1950s.  Harwell Wells of Temple Law is the current editor-in-chief. This morning's announcement of the transition is here.

I'm very much looking forward to this.  Now is an exciting time for legal history.  There are lots of people working in the field; it's deeply embedded in law schools, and has increasing attention in history departments.  Having AJLH alongside the Law and History Review, publishing timely and important work, will help the field, I hope and expect.  And I want to add that I learned a lot from editing book reviews under two fabulous editors at the Law and History Review -- Chris Tomlins and David Tanenhaus -- and more recently from observing  Elizabeth Dale as she has edited Law and History Review.  I aspire to bring Chris', David's, and Elizabeth's outstanding judgment, vision, and work ethic to AJLH.

Our new website is up now, as is our portal for manuscript submissions.

On a personal note, this is  meaningful because the AJLH published one of my first articles -- a quantitative study of litigation in a county in Pennsylvania (now Delaware) in the late seventeenth century. (That was back in the days when I did more counting than I do now!)  And, on a somewhat less happy note, they also were the first journal to reject an article submission by me -- a paper on the legal theory surrounding the suppression of abolitionist literature in the 1830s. There were a couple of really good pieces published shortly afterwards, which made my work, if not completely redundant, at least not all that important.

Update: Over at legal history blog, Dan Ernst talks some about the history of both AJLH and the American Society for Legal History -- and talks about the growth of legal history as a field from the 1950s when they were both founded.  Dan also talks about the legal history community.  Working with scholars, as authors and referees, is one of the things I'm most looking forward to.

AALS Indian Nations & Indigenous Peoples Section Call for Papers

The Indian Nations and Indigenous Peoples Section of the American Association of Law Schools (AALS) invites paper proposals on the following topic. How do Indian Tribes, First Nations, and other Indigenous Peoples regulate same-sex marriage, same-sex relationships, and adoption and foster parenting by same-sex couples and LGBT individuals? What role does evidence of Tribal culture and tradition, if any, play in these decisions? Additionally, what are the processes by which Tribes change their laws with respect to same-sex relationships? More broadly, we are interested in the ways in which Tribes, First Nations and other Indigenous Peoples regulate sexuality and family structure.

Please send proposals of 500 to 1000 words summarizing a paper or work-in-progress you would present on an AALS panel on these issues. The selected panelists will be invited to present their work in a joint program of the Indian Nations and Indigenous Peoples and the Law and Anthropology Section, which will be co-sponsored by the Family Law Section. The Program will be held at the AALS Annual Meeting, January 6-10, 2016. Selected papers will be published in the William Mitchell Law Review. Please submit your proposal on or before September 1, 2015 to Michalyn Steele, Chair-Elect, at steelem@law.byu.edu. Questions can also be directed to Ann Tweedy, Chair, at atweedy01@hamline.edu.

Ranking Law Schools with LSAT, Employment, and Citations

I have a new paper on ranking law schools with LSAT scores, employment outcomes, and law review citations.  This builds on the paper that I workshopped here at the faculty lounge last summer and that appears in the Indiana Law Journal.  I've made some changes to methodology in light of those comments and also updated the data.

The new paper is "Ranking Law Schools, 2015: Student Aptitude, Employment Outcomes, and Law Review Citations." Here is the abstract:

This essay builds on a paper released last year that ranked law schools on three variables: the median LSAT of entering students of the most recent class, the most recently available employment outcome for each school’s graduates, and citations to each school’s main law reviews over the past eight years. This paper updates that study with LSAT median data for the class entering in fall 2014, employment data for the class graduating in 2014 nine months after graduation, and the most recent law review citation data for 2007 through 2014. It studies 195 ABA approved law schools.

In addition to using more recent data, this study changes the method of combining those data. Where the last paper used simple ranks for each variable and averaged them, this study has a more granular approach to the data. It converts each school’s median LSAT score and the percentage of students employed in full-time, permanent, JD-required jobs nine months after graduation (excluding school-funded positions and solo practitioners) to standard scores. In addition, given the dramatic differences in number of law review citations among schools, it employs a common log transformation of law review citations and then converts the transformed scores to standard scores. The paper combines the first two scores to provide a two-variable ranking, and then combines all three variables to provide a three-variable ranking. The paper reports average scores for the three-variable ranking, thus permitting examination of how close schools are to each other. It also ranks the 195 ABA-approved law schools in the United States (excluding the three schools in Puerto Rico) that U.S. News included in its rankings released in March 2015. And it compares the new, two- and three- variable rankings to the U.S. News provided ranks in March 2015. It identifies the schools that improve and decline the most with the new rankings.