« What Mainstream Criminal Procedure Overlooks (and Why) | Main | More on obscure rules, limiting rules, and the Super Bowl »

Tuesday, February 05, 2013

It's here! It's here!

This morning I awoke to an email every law professor dreams about:  a Westclip citation notifying me that someone had cited my work!  My grogginess quickly morphed into awakened excitement as I wondered what prestigious legal scholar or high-powered judge had found my ideas so important that they had to cite them.  What intricate legal problem did I just help to solve?  What significant case did I help a judge decide?!

I eagerly opened the attachment to the email to find out who it was.  And it turns out...it was...ME! Indeed, Westlaw was notifying me that I had cited myself in my newly published work, Procedural Fairness in Election Contests (88 Ind. L.J 1, for all of you enterprising souls who are as excited as I am about this article).

This was the first time I had learned that the piece was now finally published, and it presents even more tasks for me to complete:  I must take the word "forthcoming" off of my CV for this article.  When do I begin my pacing of the mail room so I am there when the reprints arrive?  Should I send said reprints to each of the Supreme Court Justices, just in case for some strange reason they are not already aware of it?  Ah, the possibilities are endless!

By the way, the article actually is pretty exciting, at least for me (well duh, I wrote it, after all!).  It entails a 50-state survey of the procedures each state uses to resolve post-election disputes about the correct winner.  Each state has a detailed statutory mechanism for who decides an election contest, broken down by type of elected office.  For example, some states send these disputes to their regular judicial process (as in Bush v. Gore), while others send them to the legislature or create a specially-constituted court to resolve the dispute.  My favorite is Texas, where a post-election challenge to the state's presidential electors is decided by...wait for it...the Governor, with no possibility of appeal!  (Impartiality, anyone?)  The article recounts each of these procedures and then suggests a better, more impartial (and fair) way for states to resolve post-election litigation that roots out bias in the decision making process.

Two years of work, distilled into one simple paragraph.  Wow, this job is satsifying!

Posted by Josh Douglas on February 5, 2013 at 10:33 AM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference It's here! It's here!:


If what you say is true, then doubtless you'll be cited countless times, perhaps by others too :-)

Posted by: Dan Markel | Feb 5, 2013 11:50:04 AM

I know the feeling. There are few things better than being cited.

Posted by: Thomas Nz | Feb 5, 2013 8:13:57 PM

Post a comment