« The Upside of YA Literature's Internecine Warfare | Main | Criddle et al., Fiduciary Government (and one other general recommendation) »

Tuesday, February 05, 2019

Submission Angsting Spring 2019

This is the post to share information or ask questions about submitting to law reviews.

The comments can be used to share information, complaints, praise, etc. about which journals you have heard from, which you have not, and so forth.

Additionally, a spreadsheet to gather information is here (and embedded below).

I won't update or watch the spreadsheet. You can go ahead and add your own information by going to the spreadsheet here. The spreadsheet is editable by anyone, except that a few columns and a row (the ones highlighted in yellow) are locked, either because they auto-calculate or because tampering with them has caused a problem in the past. (If something about them needs to be changed post a comment, and I will change them.)

Entering information in the column entitled "Username" is of course totally optional, but a way to make keeping track easier. For example, if you pick a username, you will easily be able to sort by your entries and update them, instead of trying to remember what day you submitted and sorting that way. This also adds information -- showing, for example, that all of the entries on the spreadsheet come from one person, or from lots of people, etc. At any rate, totally optional, and simply a way to add more information.

Rostron and Levit's extremely helpful guide to submitting to law reviews is available here (this is the January 2019 version). The article now also includes hyperlinks to law review websites.

Comments now appear from newest to oldest.

Posted by Sarah Lawsky on February 5, 2019 at 09:00 AM | Permalink


@Newbie No, it doesn't hurt to publish there, and a good piece is good no matter where it is published, but an online supplement does not "count" anywhere the same as a print journal.

Posted by: ProfX | Mar 28, 2019 12:55:38 PM

Is Yale Law Journal Forum a good placement for an essay?

Posted by: Newbie | Mar 28, 2019 12:16:47 PM

I know a number of the more highly-ranked schools will ask faculty - either at their home institution or elsewhere - to review a piece before conferring an offer. When they send out these articles for review, is the identifying information stripped from the article (if it wasn't already submitted in such a format)? Or do the people reviewing the article know who they are reviewing? If its the latter, it might accomplish the same system of buddy professors giving each other an advantage even without the more morally suspect practice of faculty members suggesting an article a friend had written to the student editors in the first instance.

Posted by: Curious | Mar 28, 2019 9:28:05 AM

That's an interesting theory Axel. It's striking that HLR and YLR still don't use either service, and maintain their own submissions systems. How many submissions is the HLR getting per year now I wonder? I bet it's at least 5000, and I wouldn't be shocked if it were double that. Obviously very few of those submissions can possibly get more than the most cursory reading, if that (would be interested in hearing from recent HLR and YLR articles editors on this).

Posted by: Committee Member | Mar 27, 2019 11:06:34 PM


I have no inside information, but I'm guessing it has to done with price. Yes the platform is better than expresso, but I think a big function is that the higher submission cost served as a barrier to entry, filtering out non-serious submissions. I imagine that made life much easier for the top law reviews.

Posted by: AxelFoley | Mar 27, 2019 8:42:24 PM

Question for the group (sorry if this has been rehashed a lot already):

How did Scholastica end up completely overwhelming ExpressO as the service of choice among higher end reviews?

Posted by: Committee Member | Mar 27, 2019 2:33:08 PM

Aspiring - A "stealth" ding is when you see the rejection only in Scholastica, but never receive an email. So, you have to log in to Scholastica to check every now and again to know for sure where you're still in the running.

Posted by: anon | Mar 27, 2019 2:15:18 PM

What is a "stealth" ding, and how do you know if you got one?

Posted by: Aspiring | Mar 27, 2019 1:49:06 PM

Thanks Jake. That was my sense as well, but it was based on not much more than guessing at how the process works at this point in the cycle.

I'll post an update in regard to what if anything happens with the piece over the next week for the benefit of the Angsters.

Posted by: Looking for Guidance | Mar 27, 2019 1:39:03 PM

@HLS: Actually, HLS professors do not get an automatic board read at HLR. Not even close.

Source: On a recent HLR articles committee.

Posted by: Anon | Mar 27, 2019 1:31:15 PM

Anon1, it’s not just that Climenkos etc are extremely competitive. The entire fellowship/VAP market is extremely competitive. Any fellowship/VAP indicates an intense commitment to the job and a strong signal of applicant vetting. Not all of the top fellowships vet in the way you seem to think

Posted by: Anon | Mar 27, 2019 11:09:56 AM

Favors do happen, probably frequently, but it's also important to note that many junior scholars, without connections, are able to publish in top law reviews. SO I wouldn't use that as an excuse as to why you aren't able to place highly to the extent you don't have these sorts of connections. There are many open spots provided the writing is what the journals are looking for. Also noteworthy is that many authors are writing specifically for top journals as they consider their topics and the way that they structure the articles. Maybe that's not your thing.

Posted by: anon | Mar 27, 2019 10:37:45 AM

Looking for guidance, it's late enough in the season that your expedite window is rapidly closing, so if I were you, I would expedite to the whole list.

Posted by: Jake Linford | Mar 27, 2019 9:37:06 AM

I submitted four weeks ago to the entire top 100. Have gotten board reads at a couple of T-30s, but no offers until yesterday at a journal near the bottom of the list. Is it too late to try to strategically expedite by tiers? In other words should I just expedite to the whole list?

Posted by: Looking for Guidance | Mar 27, 2019 7:49:38 AM

Just one data point, but a friend at a T20 school once offered to put in a good word for me with the friend's home law review. I got the sense that the friend often does this. I never took up the offer because it felt like a dubious thing, but it was (and remains) tempting just as a means of getting on the students' radar.

Posted by: jimbob | Mar 27, 2019 7:40:06 AM

@(s)he_is_right --

I agree, mostly. For entry level hiring, for instance, a top fellowship is a much more powerful signal than article placement. The top fellowships (Bigelow, Columbia Associates, Climenko, etc.) are incredibly competitive and the selection process involves an in-depth vetting of scholarship by professors at those schools. That to me is a much more complete and significant proxy for the presumptive quality of a future scholar than whether she has placed in Boston University or in Akron. (Ditto for lateral hiring and current school quality, although I think that school rank in lateral hiring tends to be a weaker signal, given the strangeness of the entry-level market and the importance of hiring need and personal preference in placement.)

That said, in entry-level hiring, we're often in the position of either having to decide between top fellows, or, more frequently, between non-fellow marginal candidates in some initial stage of our screening. When there is no stronger proxy available, or when deciding between candidates who share a stronger proxy, I do think that article placement is useful and provides additional information. Should anyone care about an NYU vs Vanderbilt placement? I, at least, don't think there's any meaningful difference. But more frequently, we're comparing candidates with an NYU/Vanderbilt placement to candidates with an Akron/Hofstra-level placement at a stage during which we cannot actually read the articles in question. Ideally we'd have infinite time and could just read everything. But we don't, and I think that article placement--combined with work experience, law school attended, and other such factors--is a solid enough secondary proxy to be useful.

Posted by: anon1 | Mar 26, 2019 4:17:58 PM

I think charlies is on point. The discussion about home bias seems a little odd and presupposes that law review placement is a useful signal to begin with.

@anon1: I don't think the argument is that there is no qualitative difference between a top25 article and a top100 article. The point is that law review rankings do not reveal additional useful information beyond what the rest of the CV tells us.

Assume, for instance, that the US News ranking of the writer's home institution largely predicts article placement and that hiring committees do a fairly decent job at identifying good scholars. Sure, you will find that law review placement correlates with quality. But this correlation would not be meaningful, as the real screening is done by the hiring committees.

To be sure, this is just a hypothetical and I don't believe it is 100% accurate, given that journal placements (sadly) play a prominent role in hiring decisions. All I am trying to say is that looking for differences in article quality between law reviews seems to be a poor indicator for the usefulness of law review rankings. Of course, it gets much more problematic once we try to draw inferences across sub-disciplines etc.

Posted by: (s)he_is_right | Mar 26, 2019 3:28:05 PM

To chime in on these related points:

1) Placement is a good proxy for quality, albeit imperfect. I'm shocked at the ability of 2Ls to identify good research. When I put together a literature review for my work, I download nearly everything relevant to my topic. I can definitely say that top 25 law reviews tend to offer better scholarship than sub-50 law reviews. The biggest quirk is when the article is written by a non-prof; in that scenario, you're more likely to find great articles in journals ranked outside the top 50.

2) I'm highly skeptical of home placements. As mentioned, immediate advancement to a board review is powerful advantage, as well as the power asymmetries involved. And in practice, if someone's best publication or two comes via their own institution--and all of their other publications are in lower ranked journals--it definitely comes off as cronyism. And, also, professors DO publish in their home institutions at a higher rate than outside school, which indicates special consideration.

Posted by: AxelFoley | Mar 26, 2019 2:53:49 PM

I was a former HYS articles editor and we received only a small handful of unsolicited notes about articles--and so I'm skeptical about this sort of influence trading happening with any great frequency. Also, now that I'm on the other side of things, I've literally never heard of it outside of these boards. None of my colleagues have ever asked, but I wouldn't participate in something like this if I was asked.

I had a couple of other quick observations: (1) it is fairly common practice for home-school submissions to go straight to board review, which is a substantial advantage even if no additional preference is given at the board review stage; (2) certain law reviews give preference to alumni of that school (Yale does, Stanford does not)--and so 'homeschool bias' is a little broader than as described here; and (3) I really do think that there's some probative value to an article's placement.

On this final point, T25 publications are, by and large, substantially better than articles placed outside of the T100. There are a fair amount of misses (on both ends), of course, but for first-cut purposes, article placement isn't a bad proxy. This is particularly true for fellows (other than potentially Bigelow Fellows, who I do think occasionally benefit from Chicago-prof hustling), practitioners, and professors at lower-ranked schools publishing outside of their own school/alma mater. There's obviously no replacement for reading an article, but for purposes of lateral or entry-level hiring, it's also obviously not possible to read every article from every remotely colorable candidate.

Posted by: anon1 | Mar 26, 2019 2:23:22 PM

Agree about home journal publications being embarrassing, if not cronyism. The rarity of market/economic publications in Harvard and Stanford, for example, says a lot about law publishing.The nature of economics, with required simplifying assumptions, means that a student could poke holes in top scholarship. Peer reviewers will do the same. Editors will believe it is a fatal flaw, unless it is a trusted in-house prof. In fields with higher difficulty in assessing expertise, home court advantage matters more, but a scourge whenever it happens.

Posted by: Jrprof | Mar 26, 2019 12:33:15 PM

the home-bias and home-placement phenomenon is certainly questionable, but ultimately a non-issue because an "outside" placement also signals nothing about the quality of the paper.

what is there to infer from the fact that an unbiased group of 2Ls--who are busy studying for exams, and are neither lawyers nor academics--liked an article? not much as a matter of scholarship. so there is little that needs to be discounted from a home publication in the first place.

Posted by: charlies | Mar 26, 2019 10:15:53 AM

With respect to WellPublished | Mar 24, 2019 1:39:46 AM, and the "not uncommon" scenario in which professors from different schools trade touts/pushes to law reviews at their respective institutions, securing placements and rewarding those assisting with letters of reference:
Maybe I'm naive, but I DO think that's uncommon. Recognizing that this is all anonymous, and nothing will be verifiable unless names are named, I'd be interested in knowing whether you have any firsthand knowledge of that ever being attempted and working out as you describe. TBH, it's not even clear what parts you're saying actually happen, as oppose to making sense in some scenario-building.

FWIW, some of us are asked, not even annually, if we can "put in a good word" regarding a submission to the law review at our school, and refuse -- politely -- as a matter of policy. I'm sure others behave otherwise, but the prospect that there are coordinated horsetrades, that have the desired effect rather than being irrelevant, with the collateral entailments for students, just seems farfetched to me. Sorry.

Posted by: Color Me Naive | Mar 26, 2019 8:58:15 AM

Slowing down but not over. Got another offer from T25 this morning. Still on expedites at one T3 and several of the T15 that consider themselves to be T10. Dings still coming slowly as well.

Posted by: AnonFull | Mar 26, 2019 12:08:41 AM

seems like it's slowing down. any hope still?

Posted by: is it over? | Mar 25, 2019 9:46:53 PM


Why not just write them and ask for an update? Odds are if you haven't heard by now, the piece has been rejected. Journals suck at following-up to notices of final review.

Posted by: AnonProf | Mar 24, 2019 2:47:34 PM

Does anyone know how NYU Law Review's article selection process works? I received an email about a week and a half ago saying the article was under "active review by [the] Board." (Still waiting to hear back, and don't know the date of the board vote.)

Does anyone know if NYU has any further stages in its process after the board vote?


Posted by: NYU_L_Rev? | Mar 24, 2019 2:31:59 PM

I don’t think the problem is simply placing at a home journal. The stealth use of a good home journal offer or inside trading to use a friend’s quality home journal offer to signal quality and expedite off is something that can’t be traced so easily, but is much more damaging to everyone else.

Posted by: J_Doe | Mar 24, 2019 12:00:46 PM

I twice placed pieces in law journals and then ended up visiting at and lateralling to those schools, making them look like home placements, which they genuinely weren’t. I spent time agonizing over “what people would think.” This was stupid. People are going to rightly discount home placements and wrongly discount home placements. The idea that the same article gets interest in the same band is ludicrous, as we all know, ie placing in a T40 does not often mean tons of T40 offers. I stopped submitting to home journals once I realized the imbalance you mention, very early in my career. I understand this process is frustrating. But at some point we all have to put our heads down, do good work, and try not to agonize about the rest. There is randomness and corruption, and it is horrible if bonuses or other funds are at stake for your placements or if lateralling is crucial because your school is at risk or something personally important depends on it. The rest is ego.

Posted by: ANON | Mar 24, 2019 10:59:56 AM

Not sure if there is really so much innocence among so many posters regarding the realization of what goes on or whether it is just sour grapes at not being part of the game. But I will add another not uncommon aspect of the game - a professor from School A is a colleague (AKA friend) of a professor at School B. Both discuss their respective papers and think its a :great idea" and another demonstration of the "spirit of collaboration" to email the Law Review EIC of their respective schools to expect a "great" and "novel" article to be sent by their respective colleagues. It is good for the journal as it cuts down time it has already been "pre-approved" by experts. The papers have in essence been vetted. The students are also under pressure because rejecting the article risks the ire and retaliation of the home professor. By accepting the articles the student EIC in particular as well as Articles Editor (and board members) now have a happy home professor who of course the journal is "pleased to informally relate the news to the home professor" and the home professor will generously write a reference as well as push for his/her contacts "who came through" employment-wise. The mutual professors are happy to have a "lock" and do not need to waste their time with the "angsting" and can be more productive.

Posted by: WellPublished | Mar 24, 2019 1:39:46 AM

I agree 100% that it’s wrong to submit to your home institution. Power imbalance is egregious.

Posted by: AnonFull | Mar 23, 2019 10:45:31 PM

You know ... there is an easier way around these ginned up predicaments (eg t5 vs. t30). People shouldn’t submit to their home law reviews. Full stop. I never have.

AlreadyFinished - I agree it seems less egregious/problematic in the case of fellows/VAPs.

Posted by: ZIKAM | Mar 23, 2019 7:22:25 PM

"Can we just admit there’s a large degree of randomness involved?"

And yet all the breaks go to people at top schools. Fair system? LOL

Posted by: Anon | Mar 23, 2019 6:47:05 PM

If the selection system creates scenarios where the choices for a prof are between a T5 at their own institution and a T30 at another and it legitimately has earned the T5 placement, then the system is inefficient. I’ve had articles place T20 that have been rejected by T75 and had one offer before that only at T50. Can we just admit there’s a large degree of randomness involved?

Posted by: anon | Mar 23, 2019 6:27:19 PM

HLR gives authors from HLS an automatic board read and it seems that in some fields you won't get to publish in HLR unless you're at Harvard (e.g., business). UVA faculty regularly publish in VLR; Chicago faculty regularly publish with UChiLR; Berkeley, Cornell and Northwestern all publish their faculty and the work gets read without any apparent discount. So it seems to me that the commentariat is making overly broad generalizations.

Posted by: HLS | Mar 23, 2019 5:41:27 PM

Interesting responses... so out of curiosity (this does not apply to me) -- imagine a prof. at a T10 school, and her best offer on a particular article is at her school, with the second best at say a T30. She should take the T30? Or make it more extreme. Someone at a T5 who could publish in his own journal or a T30. Or does that not happen anyway because of letterhead bias?

This also makes me wonder about fellows who publish in their institution's flagship. Same assumptions? Unclear if they get the same advantages, and less risk of the professor/student dynamic described by ZIKAM.

My own tentative thought is it maybe depends on the school because some journals seem guiltier of this than others, creating more suspicion about favoritism? For example, very anecdotally, this doesn't seem to happen at HLS/ HLR.

Posted by: AlreadyFinished | Mar 23, 2019 4:43:08 PM

I've been following this thread for most of the season, haven't commented. But I wanted to jump in and add my two cents on the subject of law profs publishing in their home journal. (In case it matters, I'm a recently tenured prof at a t75 school.) Look, placement matters: it's a widespread proxy for people deciding what to read, what to cite, and it even affects the way in which someone approaches the read. With that said -- and in the vein of prejudging pieces to some extent since I cannot possibly read everything written on a topic -- I very much discount any article published by a law prof at their home law review, and at every level -- even t10 or t5. Why? Because publishing at your home law review is fraught with power asymmetries between profs at that school and the law review students who may need recommendations from that professor or that professor's friends later on. In some cases, I have now learned it ensures a board read (a powerful grant).

I remember when I was in law school we published (not my personal choice) a piece by one of our current professors who was teaching us federal courts. It was awkward of course because we were editing his piece but also in the process of receiving a grade from him. It changes the dynamic from objectivity to something far less than that. All of this to say, I personally discount a lot -- whether or not others do. So if a prof from school 17 publishes in law review 17 (her home law review), I assume she must not have had remotely comparable offers (since it would have been foolish to accept that offer if she had comparable ones that were not her home law review). Will I read it if it's on point? Of course. But if there are good alternatives I am less likely to even read or cite it. YMMV.

Posted by: ZIKAM | Mar 23, 2019 2:45:16 PM

See, that proves the point of why you shouldn't publish with your home journal. This poster gets an automatic board read, something other authors definitely do not. And if other authors did get such a perk, who can say whether this particular faculty member's piece would have risen to the top? Those are the questions in people's minds that make them discount such publications. Hopefully, home law journal isn't hoping to lateral anytime soon.

Posted by: AnonProf | Mar 23, 2019 1:28:46 PM

So you get an automatic board read but “all but” 2 homegrown articles are rejected? Sounds like a sweet deal! Getting to the board read without having to expedite or frankly do anything is gold! No need to fight through piles of competing articles or strategically manage expedites to get read. I do wonder how many other homegrown submissions are typical in a cycle— 20? 10? 5?

Posted by: To home law journal | Mar 23, 2019 1:01:40 PM

Sorry, the last comment was directed at home law journal, not BY home law journal. Not sure how that happened.

Posted by: anon | Mar 23, 2019 11:00:57 AM

You got some very bad advice, my friend.

Posted by: home law journal | Mar 23, 2019 10:37:23 AM

I asked a few days ago about publishing in the home school journal (at one of top 20 schools, journal ranks better than the school). I ended up accepting their offer and am very happy with the placement. According to the students, home faculty get a board read but they reject all but about two or so articles by home faculty per volume.

I also asked my colleagues and they disagreed with the idea that the article would have a black mark because it was placed in a home journal. The paper will be read and be evaluated on its own merit.

As to "why can’t this person place in another similarly ranked journal": the journal gave 24 hours to decide. That's very short for any competing offers.

Posted by: home law journal | Mar 23, 2019 10:31:44 AM

My prior post was in response to AlreadyFinished. I am not AlreadyFinished. Sorry for any confusion.

Posted by: Im Response to AlreadyFinished | Mar 23, 2019 7:16:46 AM

I can’t speak for others, but I do a weird, uncommon thing: I read scholarahip. If I read scholarship in, say, the Yale Law Journal that doesn’t belong there, it is usually written by a Yale prof. (and I have a specific someone in mind, who I won’t name). With some exceptions, I question why anyone publishes in their own journal, regardless of how high-ranked it may be. I suppose this effect is magnified as I move down the tiers. For instance, yesterday I saw a piece in a top-30 written by a home prof. I haven’t read it yet (I will - and I reserve judgment until I do) but my initial reaction was why can’t this person place in another similarly ranked journal? If the piece is great, it should be able to place well elsewhere. If it is bad, well, I guess that explains why the author needed the home-court advantage.

Posted by: AlreadyFinished | Mar 23, 2019 7:11:32 AM

Submitted mid-March. Went to final at one T3 but no offer. Two other T3 journals still in play. Offers at a couple of T25/T30 journals. Expediting from there.

Posted by: AnonFull | Mar 23, 2019 2:32:13 AM

I am intrigued by this comment: "When I see someone who placed an article at their home school (other than a T5, maybe T10), I just assume they couldn't otherwise get a good placement and/or benefitted from their personal relationship with the students there."

Do others agree? Where is the line beneath which you should avoid publishing in your school's flagship? Is the reason that it is assumed there isn't a home advantage at schools of a certain tier, or that suspicions of home advantage are outweighed by prestige?

Posted by: AlreadyFinished | Mar 23, 2019 1:09:07 AM

AJF: I don't think it matters at all. Those two placements are basically equivalent from a prestige standpoint (both top 50 but far from top 10). You already have one super prestigious placement. Another good not great placement added to that equals a tenure file that's going to be good enough at 90% to 95% of schools, even if you publish nothing else pre-tenure (although obviously it would be better if you did).

Posted by: Committee Member | Mar 22, 2019 12:49:44 PM

Ask for the extension. The worst that can happen is they say no. If so, take offer in hand. If not, then you get time for T50 to decide

Posted by: Anon | Mar 22, 2019 12:00:42 PM

Another question on specialty journals. I have an offer from a Y/H/S specialty, expiring today after an extension. This morning a T50 flagship emailed to say they need a few more days to decide. Do folks ever ask for second extensions? Is that disrespectful? Or is it even worth it in my case? I am a practitioner hoping to go on the academic market. Thanks for any advice!

Posted by: newbie | Mar 22, 2019 11:48:03 AM

Take the flagship. No question

Posted by: Anon | Mar 22, 2019 9:50:19 AM

For those looking for information, here's mine FWIW... I submitted late (on 3/6) to T45 only. I heard nothing but dings (from 10 journals) and one board review (NYU; still waiting to hear from them) until yesterday. Yesterday, two offers came in: William & Mary L Rev, and the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology ("JCLC"). (I was also belatedly notified yesterday from Cal L Rev that I had a board review there, but they were "unable to reach consensus.")

I have a question for the group. If I'm unable to move higher than William & Mary, is it a no-brainer to take that over JCLC? JCLC is the top-ranked crim specialty journal (my field), and it's #43 in the W&L rankings. Wm & Mary is #28 in W&L. To the extent it's relevant, (a) I've never published in either journal before, (b) my last article was published in T3 (HYS), and (c) I'm an early-career academic working toward tenure.

Thanks in advance for any guidance.

Posted by: anon junior faculty | Mar 22, 2019 9:43:07 AM


Here is what I'd do. I'd go with the T25 if nothing else comes in BUT I'd first look to see what journals are close to (but ranked below) the T25 you have that you have not yet heard from. I would then pick one that you'd like to publish in and I'd write them and say "look, I have an offer from X, but I have already published there. Thus, if you make me an offer, I will accept."

I don't like publishing in the same journal as it limits the number of journals I can list as having published in. So, I have done just what I proposed above on two separate occasions and both times it worked. I got the sense the the lower-ranked journal (but still close to my highest offer) loved the idea of stealing a piece away from a higher ranked journal, and I REALLY got the impression that they liked my promise to not expedite. You can also do it to multiple journals and just let them know that you'll take the first offer, but I don't think that sounds as flattering to the journal.

Posted by: AnonProf | Mar 21, 2019 4:59:31 PM

Reposting this:

I have an offer from a t50 law review and a t25. The t25 seems like the obvious choice, but I published there recently. Should I go with the lower ranked law school to have diversity in my publications, or does prestige always reign supreme in this game?

Posted by: Anonjunior | Mar 21, 2019 4:48:47 PM

I agree with AnonProf

Posted by: Anon | Mar 21, 2019 3:31:01 PM

I would avoid doing that (especially if you're pretenure). When I see someone who placed an article at their home school (other than a T5, maybe T10), I just assume they couldn't otherwise get a good placement and/or benefitted from their personal relationship with the students there.

Posted by: AnonProf | Mar 21, 2019 3:24:41 PM

Would you publish in a well-ranked flagship law review at home school? I don't want to rehash the debate about leveraging an offer from a home school journal. I submitted because it's great placement and I would be genuinely happy to publish there. It's a journal at one of top 20 schools and the journal itself punches above its weight in W&L and other rankings.

Posted by: home law journal | Mar 21, 2019 3:15:44 PM

Waiting, this is not a complete list, but some of the ones I didn't hear from that seemed fairly active were California, Indiana, Illinois, Ohio State, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame. Earlier in the process, I also heard from very few journals in the 40-55 range.

angsty, I got the offer I accepted 6 weeks into the process, after much angst. Hang in there.

Posted by: boring anon | Mar 21, 2019 12:08:19 AM

submitted early march and got T14 offer plus multiple T20 and T50. All came over email.

I would advise have confidence in your article; you should have an idea where it should place- it you are not a law professor anything in T50 would be awesome, T30 even more awesome though it's very unlikely to get top 10 on first shot unless there is something going on behind the scenes; in fact I would say it's also probably hard to get top 20-30 on first shot unless you are a fellow.;

If you are not happy with placement and can wait, submit in August. Not as many journals are open but most are and there are still plenty of placements to be had. People still hear well into April too.

if you are a law professor, you probably know about the range where you usually publish.

Posted by: anon | Mar 20, 2019 11:56:15 PM

Boring Anon, I am in a very similar situation, but my deadline isn't until relatively early next week. I submitted early February, now have a T50 offer in hand, currently waiting on 20+ journals above it with no communications from most of them. Any chance that you'd like to share the names of the journals who never responded to your expedite?

Posted by: Waiting | Mar 20, 2019 9:50:35 PM

I'm interested in what others think about that. I faced your dilemma twice in a row with two T20 journals, if that makes sense (i.e., back-to-back offers from Journal 1, followed by back-to-back offers from Journal 2). Both times the T20 offers were substantially higher than the offers from which I was expediting (probably around T50, like you). My colleagues advised me to take both back-to-back offers, and I haven't receive any blowback, as far as I can tell.

Posted by: AnonProf | Mar 20, 2019 9:38:49 PM

I have an offer from a t50 law review and a t25. The t25 seems like the obvious choice, but I published there recently. Should I go with the lower ranked law school to have diversity in my publications, or does prestige always reign supreme in this game?

Posted by: Anonjunior | Mar 20, 2019 8:55:44 PM

Post a comment