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

Student-Edited Law Journals as Experiential Learning: My Road to “Duh”

If you’re a legal educator in the U.S., then you’re no doubt aware of the perennial pedagogical debate over theory vs. doctrine vs. practical experience. Even though I’ve been a podium professor for most of my teaching career, I generally agree that law schools should be doing more to prepare our students for legal practice. When advising students on elective course selection, I’m quick to recommend doing clinics, internships, skills courses, and advocacy competitions.

Curiously, I usually have not mentioned law journal participation in the same breath as skills development. Rather, I’ve been more likely to encourage students to pursue journal opportunities because of their credential value. Lately, however, I’ve noticed that some law schools are including their student-edited law journals under the experiential learning sections of their websites. This is an interesting change from touting law journal membership as an academic honor, but perhaps this is a nod to the current marketing value of pitching practical learning experiences. In any case, I’d like to dive into the merits of law journal work as experiential learning, inspired by a recent epiphany I had in my role as a faculty advisor to the Suffolk University Law Review. 

The Standard View

Legal educators have long recognized the potential benefits of law journal participation, among the most prominent being:

• Obtaining a valuable employment credential, especially membership on the flagship law review.
• Reinforcing the close, detail-oriented aspects of legal research and writing, including reviewing, editing, and proofreading legal manuscripts; evaluating the merits of legal and policy arguments; and mastering cite checking and basic legal citation form.
• Researching and writing a Note or Comment on a topic of interest, with the possibility of published article.

Of course, that line or two on a resume often captures a lot of precise, brain-taxing, eye-straining grunt work. While some may have soggy, sentimental memories of cite checking, Bluebooking, article editing, and the like, many others regard this experience as having been a simple exchange: In return for this hard, dull slog and a few academic credits, I enjoyed some genuine benefits that enhanced my career prospects.

Some have suggested that this model of scholarly publishing exploits student labor, reasoning that law students are essentially doing unpaid work (with tuition charged to boot) for law professors and other authors. In fact, earlier this year, law students at New York University submitted a petition calling for students to receive compensation for law journal work, reasoning that they are engaging in labor that enhances the credentials and reputations of their authors.

By classifying journal membership as an academic honor that can enhance job and career opportunities, law schools have largely been able to dodge this issue. However, based on extensive work I’ve done concerning unpaid internships, I think it merits fair consideration, which I plan to do in a later post. For now, however, I’d like to look more closely at the educational benefits of law journal work for our students.

My Road to “Duh”

Last summer, I decided that I wanted to be more engaged as a faculty advisor to our flagship law review at Suffolk University Law School. I contacted the senior members of the new editorial board, sharing some ideas and generally expressing my willingness to be an active resource. As luck would have it, I picked a great year to do this outreach. The editors explained to me that one of their top goals was to create a more positive culture for all students involved with the Law Review. They welcomed my interest in being more closely involved in a mentoring and support role.

Fostering Professional Identities: Ikigai, Tolstoy, and Therapeutic Jurisprudence

Recently I’ve had several conversations with fellow law professors about the American Bar Association’s new Accreditation Standard 303(b)(3), which holds that law schools “should provide substantial opportunities to students” for the “development of a professional identity.” The ABA’s Interpretation 303-5 of that Standard states that:

…(P)rofessional identity focuses on what it means to be a lawyer and the special obligations lawyers have to their clients and society. The development of a professional identity should involve an intentional exploration of the values, guiding principles, and well-being practices considered foundational to successful legal practice. Because developing a professional identity requires reflection and growth over time, students should have frequent opportunities for such development during each year of law school and in a variety of courses and co-curricular and professional development activities.

I confess my skepticism towards ABA requirements that can easily prompt somewhat ham-handed attempts to treat topics about values and personal qualities as content to be covered -- in this case, shoehorning professional identity formation into enough courses to claim regulatory compliance. Rather, I see professional identity formation as something that develops organically and depends a lot on (1) the social, emotional, and intellectual maturity of individual students, and (2) legal educators and lawyers being aware of openings to weave potentially teachable moments into conversations and discussions.

Nevertheless, the topic itself is important for our students' professional development. As my Suffolk Law colleague Harmony Decosimo points out in her insightful taxonomy of factors contributing to professional identity formation, values, wellness, and professional competencies are all part of the mix. As I see it, opportunities to highlight these elements may occur at any time and in unscripted ways, such as a student’s response to a simulation exercise or clinical assignment, a professor’s reference to some aspect of practice, or an attorney’s account about representing a client in an important case.

To the extent that professional identity is tagged as a topic for classroom discussion, the approach should be engaging and contemplative, rather than directive or pedantic. Towards that end, I’d like to look at three items: (1) a Japanese concept for examining life purpose; (2) a novella by Leo Tolstoy that invites big questions about life and work; and, (3) a school of theory and practice that can serve as a useful lens for creating a life in the law.

Ikigai

Ikigai, explains Wikipedia, “is a Japanese concept referring to something that gives a person a sense of purpose, a reason for living.” It is usually captured via some version of the diagram reproduced here. Being at the intersecting center of all four circles is the state of ikigai.

Laura Oliver, writing for the World Economic Forum, says that the philosophy and practice of ikigai is “a way to live longer and better.” She explains:

While there is no direct English translation, ikigai is thought to combine the Japanese words ikiru, meaning “to live,” and kai, meaning “the realization of what one hopes for.” Together these definitions create the concept of “a reason to live” or the idea of having a purpose in life.

Oliver adds that those who have studied ikigai raise four key questions to start us down the path toward an ideal state:

• “What do you love?”
• “What are you good at?”
• “What does the world need from you?”
• “What can you get paid for?”

Hmm, this sounds like an invitation to law students to consider professional identity formation.

U. South Dakota seeking abstracts for Rural Lawyers Symposium

Abstracts are due 6/16:

Rural Lawyers Symposium

The South Dakota Law Review seeks article proposals, speakers, and panel participants for a symposium on issues related to rural lawyers. The Rural Lawyer symposium will be held in Vermillion, South Dakota, on September 21 and 22, 2023.

Abstracts of 300-500 words are due June 16, 2023.

The symposium will focus on rural lawyers. The editors seek articles and speakers that address one or more of the following topics, or other related topics:

1. Indigent defense in rural communities
2. Conflicts of interest for rural lawyers
3. The practice of law in rural areas, including on rural reservations
4. Best pedagogical approaches to training future rural lawyers
5. The study of rural lawyers as an academic discipline
6. Incentive programs for rural lawyers or other rural professionals
7. The ten-year anniversary of South Dakota’s Rural Attorney Recruitment Program
8. Licensure policies and impact on rural areas
9. The viability of small towns

The editors actively seek diverse viewpoints and diverse scholarly approaches.  Although the symposium is not a historical or comparative project, the editors welcome articles with historical or comparative features.

In your proposal, please indicate whether you would be interested in (1) publishing your topic, (2) speaking at the symposium, or (3) both. Priority will be given to proposals where the contributor expects to both publish and speak at our in-person event, although we will consider other proposals.

The Call for Papers opens today with abstracts due on June 16, 2023. Please send abstracts to [email protected]. Selected contributors will be notified by July 1, 2023. Finished articles will be due Friday, December 1, 2023. Our editors will work with you over the winter 2023-24 to prepare your work for publication. The symposium volume will be published and released in the summer of 2024.

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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected].

 

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 [email protected] 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 [email protected].

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 [email protected]. 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 [email protected].

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 [email protected] and [email protected]   

 

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 [email protected]. 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  [email protected] 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.