« Preparing for Fall Teaching: Guest Post on Combining Asynchronous and Live Online Teaching--Reasons and Strategies | Main | Biskupic on the internal workings of the Roberts Court »

Saturday, July 25, 2020

Submission Angsting Fall 2020

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, but please be patient.)

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 July 2020 version). The article now also includes hyperlinks to law review websites.

Posted by Sarah Lawsky on July 25, 2020 at 02:48 PM in Law Review Review | Permalink


@ Sep 17, 2020 3:12:42 PM - The specifically told me that they are full.

Posted by: nachosbelgrande | Sep 18, 2020 12:20:55 PM

@SmoothCriminalAtty - the same thing happened to me twice already.

Posted by: PostDocGuy | Sep 17, 2020 5:18:15 PM

Submitted an article to three journals on September 17th. A record for me and unlikely to actually result in any acceptances. I can say I submitted though.

Posted by: Magnolia | Sep 17, 2020 4:34:32 PM

@postdocguy - I emailed several places I had submitted on expressO and hadn't heard back from on expedites, just for the heck of it. Most didn't respond, but one was like, oh, thanks for emailing us, we don't use expresso anymore...

I wanted to reach through the internet and punch them in the face, but instead I just sent them a copy of my article. To their credit, they read and rejected it in a timely manner.

I wonder how many other places we are paying to submit to "don't use" expresso (and/or scholastica), but we'll never know?

Posted by: SmoothCriminalAtty | Sep 17, 2020 3:26:37 PM

@nachosbelgrande, what are you basing your "full" statements on? Nothing reported in the spreadsheet on either S. Cal or GW

Posted by: Anon | Sep 17, 2020 3:12:42 PM

I received an offer from a journal from which I have previously withdrawn my submission. The offer contains detailed suggestions for future revision....

Posted by: Anooooon | Sep 17, 2020 3:06:40 PM

GW is full.

Posted by: nachosbelgrande | Sep 17, 2020 2:54:55 PM

Just got a rejection from the Texas Law Review, which was odd because I did not remember submitting there. Looked closer and saw that it was for an article that I submitted about 18 months ago, which had already been accepted and published elsewhere.

Posted by: Befuddled | Sep 17, 2020 12:09:16 PM

Me: here's my paper
me: I got another offer, please expedite the review.
me: I got a second offer, please expedite.
me: I got a third offer, deadline is tomorrow.
me:are you going to give me an answer before the deadline?
me: I accepted the offer. Please consider the paper withdrawn.
journal (5,985 days later): we receive many outstanding submissions, and frequently we must make the difficult decision to turn down an excellent piece of scholarship.

Posted by: anon | Sep 17, 2020 10:41:52 AM

Southern Cal is full.

Posted by: nachosbelgrande | Sep 16, 2020 6:11:55 PM

Chicago is full

Posted by: Anon | Sep 15, 2020 10:15:36 PM

@anon | Sep 15, 2020 9:43:28 AM:
Thanks. I thought about that but it's strange: why are the t20 more responsive? Shouldn't it be the other way around? The lower ranked journals face a strong competition so that you would expect them to be fast and communicative

Posted by: PostDocGuy | Sep 15, 2020 2:24:31 PM

Columbia (Articles) just closed on Scholastica. Guessing they are close to full (if not already).

Posted by: anon | Sep 15, 2020 12:04:54 PM

@PostDocGuy: I think your observation is correct but the conclusion is wrong. You will surely hear less from ExpressO journals, but this is not because Scholastica serves as a screening mechanism or because ExpressO submissions are ignored. It is much simpler. Top-20 flagship journals have always responded. Top-50 - a little less (with journals like USC and Emory known for being consistently rude). Below that, you will rarely hear from journals unless they extend publication offers. Because you use Scholastica to submit to top-60 - 70 flagship journals and ExpressO for all the rest, you get more responses to Scholastica submissions.

Posted by: anon | Sep 15, 2020 9:43:28 AM

I wanted to share some thoughts about ExpressO, and was wondering if I'm the only one who feels this way. In addition to the newest problem (that they now basically exclude practitioners and oversea profs from submitting, because only those affiliated with "registered institutions" can submit), my sense is that something isn't working well there, in the sense that most journals just don't bother responding to ExpressO submissions. The response rate in Scholastica, from my experience, is about 10 times higher. Is this because journals have started using Scholastica as a sort of screening device? i.e. those who spend less money by submitting via ExpressO are viewed disfavorably for some reason?

Posted by: PostDocGuy | Sep 15, 2020 8:53:43 AM

Guess I have to start thinking of a different title for my spring cycle re-submission.

Posted by: wheredidpeoplego? | Sep 14, 2020 1:27:59 PM

Not to beleaguer the discussion on secondary journals, but anyone have thoughts on/experience with the Harvard Journal of Law and Gender? Any idea how it compares reputation-wise with other journals in the area, outside of what the rankings say? Are they easy to work with?

Posted by: newprof | Sep 13, 2020 8:42:40 PM

"You claimed in a post below 'And I remember from law school, the administration cared so much about the flagship and let the specialties yolo.'
Really? Law schools do not care about their corporate law or international law journals, they only care about their standard law reviews - that is your claim?
What decade did you go to law school?
Which school did you attend?"

I am not Axel Foley, but his/her comments jibe with my own impressions. I attended law school within this decade (HYS) and was substantially involved on both the school's flagship and a well-respected specialty journal at the school. There was no comparison in the resources that the school institutionally put into the two journals. There was also no comparison in the structural set up of these two journals; the flagship had significantly more committed students and significantly greater accountability structures. I'd like to think that my specialty journal still managed to do a great job, but there's no doubt that these differences existed in a big way.

I'm not an advisor for any of my current institution's journals, so I can only speak from a second- or third-hand perspective there, but my sense is that things work similarly at my current school. I've spent some time at other institutions in various capacities as well, and my sense from that is that it's pretty common for flagship journals to be favored in one or more meaningful way.

Posted by: anon3 | Sep 13, 2020 12:15:06 PM

Really?, of course my experiences are anecdotal. I'm not saying that all schools don't care about their secondaries, but they almost all pay more attention and demand a higher standard from the flagships--relatively so. And even if administrations take a more hands off approach to specialties, that's not to say that the student editors are not dutifully and professionally running them. But in my experience, secondaries and their EICs have a lot more freedom and autonomy to accept articles, execute the publication schedule, etc. I could enumerate my experiences but it is all anecdotal. So take it or leave it.

And for what's worth (probably very little), I went to law school entirely in the last decade (between 2010 to 2019), though I'm not saying which one.

Posted by: Axel Foley | Sep 13, 2020 12:07:55 PM

Message for "AxelFoley",
You claimed in a post below "And I remember from law school, the administration cared so much about the flagship and let the specialties yolo."
Really? Law schools do not care about their corporate law or international law journals, they only care about their standard law reviews - that is your claim?
What decade did you go to law school?
Which school did you attend?

Posted by: Really? | Sep 13, 2020 7:16:48 AM

Does anyone know the status at: Emory, GW, USC, Georgetown, Chicago, or Virginia? Are any of these still reviewing?

Posted by: annoning | Sep 12, 2020 6:13:44 PM


If you're a business law professor, maybe you should mind your own..."business"...when it comes to discussing crim law journals.

Hahahahahahaha. Actually, I'm not mad at all, Axel, and not trying to be rude. I just couldn't let the dad-level pun pass by.

Posted by: thegreatdisappointment | Sep 11, 2020 2:41:26 PM

nonono & postdocguy, from what you say, it looks like new crim law review is potentially good, especially if it's peer review. But please also realize that I got the wrong impression of NCLR because I'm a business law prof. Further, most other business law and non-crim profs are likely to have never heard of it. So if your goal is to build your CV among crim law people, this could do the trick. If your goal is to build your reputation across fields, a general law review might do a better job.

To me, this highlights a bigger issue with publishing in specialties: opinions vary wildly. Just look at that insane debate earlier about SJIL. With most flagships, there's a greater level of communal agreement.

Posted by: Axel Foley | Sep 11, 2020 1:34:47 PM

@anon1 -- I'm not sure. I submitted expedite requests a week ago that expired this morning to UVA, Gtown, GW, Vandy, Illinois, and Wisconsin. I heard back from none of them. I was a little surprised as it seemed like Wisconsin was responsive at least to expedites, even if it was a desk rejection.

I assume the journals that have been silent, like UVA, are backed up. The past couple of months have been hellish for everyone. Some students have had job offers pulled from firms or just simply no-offered. Journal leadership is likely trying to preserve moral since most journals have likely had social events banned by the respective university's COVID policy. I would imagine that responding to each and every request from professors is the first thing to go.

I certainly don't take silence personally. Particularly when law professors aren't exactly the most responsive bunch in the first place when it comes to student questions. Perhaps the silence is a teaching moment for students and professors!

Posted by: caffeine | Sep 11, 2020 9:36:53 AM

To postdocguy, I agree with nonono.
Do yourself a favor, ignore 90% plus of the guidance given out. Most posts are laughable "I heard ..." "I was told..."
Following the "free" suggestions on this forum is very risky.

Posted by: Topostdocguy | Sep 11, 2020 7:45:47 AM

@nonono- many thanks, that makes sense and fits well with my impression of the journal.

Posted by: PostDocGuy | Sep 11, 2020 3:06:13 AM


NCLR is a good placement in the crim community! Any school making crim hires will have a crim person on the hiring committee who knows it. Just look at the people publishing there. It's an impressive list. It's got a more crim theory lean than some crim specialty journals (especially student-run journals), and as a result puts out work by more comparativists and scholars from other countries. But you'd still recognize a lot of the names publishing there in just the last year:


I'm not sure what axel is talking about it being a UCI student-edited speciality. It's a peer-reviewed quarterly journal published by UC Press. I'm not saying you should always take it over a t-50 placement when you're going on the entry level market, but the notion that it should not be "ranked," whatever that actually means, is just totally absurd.

Posted by: nonono | Sep 11, 2020 1:27:49 AM

Thanks, Axel!

Posted by: Perplexed | Sep 10, 2020 5:41:09 PM

Does anyone know what's happening with UVA? Seems like no notifications have been going out from them--either for acceptances or rejections. Have they filled their volume?

Posted by: anon1 | Sep 10, 2020 2:12:30 PM

Like a non said, if you're conflicted, tie goes to the flagship. One major reason is that publishing with a flagship is typically a much more pleasant experience. Administrations oversee flagships to a much greater extent and demand a much greater level of professionalism relative to secondaries. For nearly every colleague who's described a nightmare publishing experience, it was with a specialty--me included. And I remember from law school, the administration cared so much about the flagship and let the specialties yolo.

postdocguy, never heard of it. I doubt many others have heard of it. From a quick google search, it appears like it's a specialty from UC Irvine. I wouldn't even rank the New Crim Law Review. It might carry some currency within the crim law community, but it certainly has no reputation or currency out of the crim law world. In other words, take the flagship.

Posted by: Axel Foley | Sep 10, 2020 12:19:11 PM

How would you rank the "New Criminal Law Review" compared to, say, a t70 flagship? the NCLR seems to be highly regarded (notwithstanding the low ranking on W&L) but I'm not quite sure what to compare it to..

Posted by: PostDocGuy | Sep 10, 2020 11:53:27 AM

@perplexed -

I don't think you can reduce things so easily. For some, Hastings will be viewed as a T40 journal. For others, it'll be viewed as a T60 journal. There will be higher variability with Hastings than there will be with a lot of other journals in its current or former rankings range -- and there are real advantages and disadvantages that come with that.

All of that said, for hiring committee purposes, assuming you don't need to amplify your business bona fides and that they will shine through on your CV/FAR form regardless, I'd go with Hastings over Harvard or Stanford's business journals. As you can see on these boards, there's a real split in the academy as to how specialty journals are evaluated. Some here really like specialty journals. Everyone, though, recognizes the value of top flagship publications. I would generally err slightly in favor of publishing in a flagship for hiring purposes -- and that pushes Hastings over the edge for me. This is all less true if your CV doesn't already have fancy names on it (for law school, for clerkship, for PhDs, or for fellowships), but it's more true if you've previously only published in specialty journals.

Posted by: a non | Sep 10, 2020 10:38:34 AM


Thanks! So I am guessing you would take the specialty journal placement?

On the low...I was hoping that the peer-reviewed element of Hasting and its higher position in the peer rankings would push it in the T40s...Guess no.

Posted by: perplexed | Sep 10, 2020 10:24:22 AM


Here's how I view Hastings. Hasting's current ranking is 63 and its reputation score is 43rd. This suggests that people perceive Hastings (and the Hastings Law Journal) as better than its pure ranking. If you look here (https://7sage.com/top-law-school-rankings/) you can also see that Hastings used to be ranked in the 40s a few years ago. At this point, we can agree that people probably view the journal differently, so it's tough to say it's the equivalent of X number. but it's probably within a band of 45 to 59, depending on the eye of the beholder. In my head, it's the equivalent of a high 50s along with Tulane and Florida State.

Posted by: Axel Foley | Sep 10, 2020 9:10:55 AM

@Tony Smith
Thanks for replying.
My area of specialty is business law/international business law

The specialty is T3 - but not Yale J Reg...
My competing offer is from Hastings LJ

My problem is that I cannot figure out whether Hasting LJ is considered T60, T50, or T40. USNews rankings have been up and down. In W&L it ranks 41...

Clearly - I hope that my article will be read ...minimizing the "placement" issue. Nevertheless, there is the issue of trying to make the "best" possible impression when hiring committees glance at my CV.

Posted by: perplexed | Sep 9, 2020 6:47:21 PM


Some perceive flagships as most prestigious and take any T50 over any specialty. Others prefer to publish with some specialties affiliated with top institutions rather than at a non-T20 flagship. It’s impossible to please everyone. Someone earlier said that HBLR is “TOP” in the field. That’s an opinion, which I think is very valid, but with which I disagree. But who cares? The truth is that you cannot go wrong with the choice you have. Washington Law Review, for example, is an excellent placement. And so is HBLR, or most HYS specialties for that matter. If your article is good (which is what should matter the most), it will get read and cited if you publish it in any of those journals. Go with your gut feeling or with what you feel most comfortable. If you are pre-tenure and still building your portfolio, thinking of lateraling or going to the job market, I would lean towards the flagships you mentioned because they just seem safer to me (not necessarily better). But that is just my opinion. Oh, and I would not put as much weight on the W&L rankings as some folks here seem to be doing, especially when it comes to specialties. There is some wacky stuff out there.

Posted by: anonthefence | Sep 9, 2020 3:10:44 PM

AnonBusProf, dont waste your time here, these posters are obsessed with "flagships". Most are clueless posting nonsense based on hearsay, self-interest or opinions based on decades old "wisdom" that the lemmings here lap up (or something more machiavellian). Harvard Business Law Review is a very prestigious placement.

Posted by: Corporate Law Prof | Sep 9, 2020 1:31:12 PM

@Az8: I tried to be as clear as possible without disclosing my identity. T40 general law review such as Arizona, Utah, or Washington v. HYS specialty which is a top 100 journal on W&L. There are quite a few (I am just copying from the W&L top 100 list):
1 Stanford Technology Law Review [online]
2 Harvard Law Review Forum [online]
3 Harvard Law & Policy Review
4 Harvard Journal of Law & Technology
5 Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy
6 Harvard Environmental Law Review
7 Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review
8 Harvard Journal on Legislation
9 Harvard International Law Journal
10 Harvard Journal of Law & Gender
11 Yale Law Journal Forum [online]
12 Yale Journal on Regulation
13 Yale Law & Policy Review
14 Yale Journal of Law & Technology [online]

Posted by: anonewbe | Sep 9, 2020 12:29:59 PM

Az8 - I am not sure where you get your information from, but as a business law professor I can tell you that HBLR is probably the TOP specialty in business law. Just look at who published there the last 3-4 years. I know for a fact that many professors would take it over anything that is not a top-20 mainline.

Posted by: AnonBusProf. | Sep 9, 2020 9:52:01 AM

anonewbe - it really isn't possible to answer that without knowing which journal you're thinking of, as the discussion about SJIL demonstrated. Many HYS journals are well regarded and some may be on a par with a T40 generalist journal. But when a journal isn't in the top 5 or top 10 journals in its own area, it likely wouldn't compare with a T40 generalist placement. A T40 placement is quite good.

Harvard Law & Policy, Yale Journal on Regulation are the top journals in their area and may be considered on a par with T40, but Harvard's business law journal is outside the top 20 in its specific field and just can't compare with a T40 generalist journal.

Posted by: Az8 | Sep 9, 2020 9:32:44 AM

Texas just closed on Scholastica...

Posted by: anon | Sep 8, 2020 5:52:21 PM

A hypothetical dilemma:

Which would you rather have - an article published at a journal ranked 100 that is cited 250 times, or an article published in the 10th ranked journal cited 25 times?

Posted by: asking | Sep 8, 2020 4:32:28 PM

I didn't want this to turn into a battle over the reputation of a specific journal. Most Harvard specialty journals are among the top 100 in Washington & Lee, and many Yale specialty journals are also in this range. I was just trying to figure out whether one of those is preferable to, say, Arizona Law Review, Utah Law Review, Washington Law Review, etc. (general law reviews in the 40-55 range).

Posted by: anonewbe | Sep 8, 2020 4:22:31 PM

anonewbe -- Depends upon the specialty journal. Harv CR-CL is better than most of the HYS specialty journals. I wouldn't go with Stan CR-CL over a top 40. At Yale, J Reg, Int'l Law, and Law % Poly have decent reputations. Check Wash and Lee when in doubt. But it is best to answer these questions with a specific journal in mind. Just being a specialty journal at a top school doesn't mean it outranks everything in the top 40 (but the reverse is also true).

Posted by: Tony Smith | Sep 8, 2020 1:34:09 PM

@Perplexed: In order to answer that question, I would need to know more about the specialty journal -- like the name. These are important factors. Also, what is your area of scholarship? T20, former Assoc Dean.

Posted by: Tony Smith | Sep 8, 2020 1:30:33 PM

@NewProf I heard from them late last week when I submitted an expedite request that they anticipate their process completing in "late September."

Posted by: Anon | Sep 8, 2020 8:48:20 AM

Has anyone heard from Harvard CR-CL?

Posted by: NewProf | Sep 8, 2020 7:32:54 AM

One day before offer expires - is it acceptable to write to specific journals to inquire about the status of the expedite request? Had anyone had success with such an inquiry?

Posted by: Specialty Journal | Sep 8, 2020 3:13:22 AM

I find it almost heartening to know that professors behave the same as students do on anonymous forums

Posted by: 3L from earlier | Sep 7, 2020 7:06:37 PM

Where would Constitutional Commentary fall? Would it be equivalent of a T-30? T-50? T-75?

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Posted by: pencilneck | Sep 7, 2020 6:55:35 PM

I am at a T100+ law school...untenured...I am trying to build a profile for a lateral...

I have an offer from Hasting LJ and a competing offer from a T3 specialty [not international law - no more SJIL debate pls]

How good is Hastings LJ considered nowadays? Their USnews rankings have varied a lot. Their W&L ranking has also jumped quite a bit...

Posted by: perplexed | Sep 7, 2020 6:37:17 PM

Back to angsting and information...

The spreadsheet suggests that Chicago, GW, and Texas were all sending rejections. But they don't seem to have done so recently. Are they closed now? What do we think?

Posted by: annoning | Sep 7, 2020 5:54:06 PM

This is starting to look like one of those annoying faculty meetings where everyone needs to express their opinion (each more persuasive than the one before or the one after, of course). Let's keep the eye on the ball, guys. All I want is questionable information that will increase my hopes to unsustainable heights, just like a fed-fueled stock market bubble.

Posted by: theRealAnonymous | Sep 7, 2020 1:26:57 PM

This thread is interesting and I concur with the opinion that Stanford International is a great placement. I also agree that someone here is trying to give a "bad name" to the Stanford international journal. If you read the posts some of the numbers are falsified (also note W&L breaks categories into impact, combined, journal cites, court cites so this is ripe for manipulation). Also someone claimed that Stanford International is "upper half of Tier 3" - this usage of the term "Tier 3" is speciously used to make it sound like Stanford International is low or bottom of the barrel like a Tier 3 or 4 law school. Using such a term is desgned to paint Stanford International as a bad placement. Then someone else (or the same person) used Tiers 1- 3 to identify 12 - yes 12 - journals. They claimed Stanford is in Tier 3. But this is out of 12 great law schools - if Tier 3 is still in the Top 12 of all international law journals that is somehow "bad"?
Is Yale International or Harvard International "better" because those have higher rankings?...There is a fundamental mistake here - no one on a hiring committee or appointments (of course there might be exceptions) is going to look down at a candidate that published an outstanding work of scholarhip because the journal is ranked "75" and not in a "Top 14" and this holds for law reviews and international law journals. Moreover, and specifically to Stanford International, a great piece in the Stanford International Journal will not be evaluated as "bad" if W&L ranks it 15 in impact rather than Penn International or Harvard International (I am just picking names) if these journal impact factors are for example #5. No one on the academic appointments committee will turn down a lateral hire because "oh look Stanford is #15 impact and he did not place in journals ranked #1-#14". In the real world of academia, where decisions are made, scant attention (i.e., none at all) is given to looking up specific rankings. Of course if the publication is from a tertiary institution or a new one these will be accorded a significantly lower weighting (but see UCIrvine - there are exceptions). Clearly, obscure specialties (which we presume have trouble attracting authors and will make offers without vetting the piece) will also be given much less (or no) weight. This however, does not apply to Stanford International which receives a deluge of submissions as do all the T14 international law journals. Accordingly, write a good article that will be respected by your peers and which often leads to the commitee to reach out to a potential candidate. No one cares if the rank is "x"; you will be contacted. The most important goal should be a good paper that will generate discussion in your field and bring attention from hiring committees. To that end, Stanford International is as good as any other T14 international law placement. Rather than worrying about rank do a better job at writing your paper.

Posted by: YetAnotherProfessor's2cents | Sep 7, 2020 1:10:08 PM

Hi everyone. Please chill out. It’s just a journal article. You will all be OK. There’s more to life than this.

Be aware that if this escalates, this very helpful forum will eventually be shut down. So let’s minimize the name calling and personal attacks.

I also feel obligated to add now, just in case it’s helpful for anyone: The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is available 24 hours at 800-273-8255.

Posted by: Relax | Sep 7, 2020 12:53:36 PM

@thegreatdisappointment - will you report your self-shooting in the SJIL?

Posted by: PostDocGuy | Sep 7, 2020 12:34:54 PM

I'm going to shoot myself.

Posted by: thegreatdisappointment | Sep 7, 2020 11:54:38 AM

To borrow from FLOTUS, I really don't care about where SJIL ranks, do u? The point worth making is that specialty journals don't always equate with school ranking in the way that almost all flagship journals do.

Also, if your audience is international a further twist is that many of your readers will only be familiar with 10-15 American universities. OTOH, my impression is that most overseas academics in my field (one of the private international law ones) aren't obsessed with placement. Instead they'll just read and engage with any articles that are on point, interesting, and well-written. This may be different in other international law fields so if these things matter to you and you're new to this make sure to check in with a few people.

Ok, back to chilling.

Posted by: yet another intl prof | Sep 7, 2020 10:50:04 AM

I think that what we have here is a basic cultural disagreement. I'm not an international law scholar, and will probably never even submit to any of these journals, so I don't have anything at stake in this debate.

In the hierarchical and prestige-obsessed U.S., being the 16th (or 21st or 26th) best specialty journal in a field is not particularly impressive. There are many U.S. legal academics (and not just at T10 or T20 schools) who suggest that not being published at all is preferable to accepting a publication in a non-elite specialty journal--which I've most commonly heard defined as being a specialty journal outside of the top 5 or 10 in a given field. I personally wouldn't publish in the fifteenth or twentieth (or twenty-fifth!) best specialty journal in my field, not because I don't think these journals are worthwhile, but because I know that so many of my colleagues believe that they are not. That's particularly true where, as is the case here, the journal in question is poorly ranked in absolute terms, and not only when compared with other journals in its specialty; SJIL falls outside of the top 200 *specialty* journals on the W&L ranking, and is ranked 371 overall in the combined rankings (slightly below the Rutgers Journal of Law and Social Policy). When there are many law professors who hesitate--correctly or not--to publish in any journal ranked outside of the top 100 overall, it's hard to argue that SJIL's ranking isn't at least a cause for some hesitation for a U.S. legal academic. There are obviously mitigating factors, including the Stanford affiliation and SJIL's reputation (which seems from this discussion to be better than what its 371 ranking might suggest).

From my experience, little of the above is true for non-U.S. legal academia.

That is to say, a journal that appears "way below the rankings" to a U.S. legal academic (and SJIL certainly appears as such to me) may appear to be nothing of the sort to a non-U.S. legal academic. I may well be wrong about the identity of the internationalist posting so angrily in defense of SJIL, but this feels to me like an argument shaped more by starkly different cultural ideas of hierarchy and prestige than by bad faith.

Can we put this to rest and move on? Given that there appear to be insurmountable and possibly cultural differences between how those on this board consider rankings, I just don't see how much more discussion will be productive. (E.g., I don't see Experienced/BeCarfulOutThere/ToLOLWhat/Intl prof 3 changing his/her mind about how impressive it is for SJIL to be the 16th/21st/26th-best international law journal, nor do I see anyone else's mind changing significantly on the subject.)

Posted by: anon | Sep 7, 2020 10:01:28 AM

@Intl prof 3 Give it a break. There is no need to go full Geng Shuang on all of us here.

Back to the main purpose of this thread: Are journals slower than usual this cycle? Or has the fat lady sung?

Posted by: rawprawf | Sep 7, 2020 10:01:19 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.