I know because I started researching this issue a day after the Nov election I swear, allowing untrained students to edit influential scholarly journals will be the end of us - ThreadSky

mayasen.bsky.social • 1 day ago

I know because I started researching this issue a day after the Nov election

I swear, allowing untrained students to edit influential scholarly journals will be the end of us

Comments

jamesfeigenbaum.bsky.social•1 day ago

Honest q: how did law reviews end up being edited by students while every other discipline avoided such a (stupid and obviously flawed) practice?

mayasen.bsky.social•1 day ago

I actually don’t know but I suspect the law review system predates the widespread adoption of peer review

Why switch to cell phones when you’ve got a good network of landlines?

easorion.bsky.social•1 day ago

Additionally, in my experience, practicing lawyers and academic lawyers are quite different, and both are insulated from the rest of the academy (partially due to the structure of law school).
Then add the hubris of economics, with math fully replaced by rhetoric freed from concern for consequences

jamesfeigenbaum.bsky.social•1 day ago

Ha. I'm going to ask around but learning about the history of peer review doesn't feel likely to generate any identification opportunities so...

anonymousvc.bsky.social•1 day ago

No, what will end us is the NYT publishing Federalist Society bros opinion pieces about legal theories that have no basis in the law or history.

profmlremmel.bsky.social•1 day ago

I tell my students that for my research methods class, law review articles will not count as peer-reviewed work.

mayasen.bsky.social•1 day ago

100%

Unless they’re also law students, they absolutely should not

mayasen.bsky.social•1 day ago

Me: goddamit, I hope there’s no law review out there arguing third term presidencies are ok

Me, finding said articles:

cherrycapital.bsky.social•1 day ago

I guess it's better we find these and prepare now.

openartdata.bsky.social•1 day ago

Who are the authors?

jeremypress.bsky.social•1 day ago

Seriously, why haven’t law professors ended this silly system? Is it just laziness?

gelbach.bsky.social•1 day ago

It’s fashionable to mock the law review system, but I don’t think what’s published in a law review somewhere makes any more difference to the political success of ludicrous claims than what is published in peer reviewed journals, whether in polisci, Econ, or melsewhere.

jvagle.me•1 day ago

Indeed. See, e.g., the MMR autism article published (and later retracted) by the Lancet. The retraction didn't matter that much to a certain crowd, however, and now we have RFK jr as HHS Sec.

gelbach.bsky.social•1 day ago

You mean that wasn't 2Ls' fault?

jvagle.me•1 day ago

Maybe the Lancet has sleep-deprived first year residents doing the peer review.

anthonymkreis.bsky.social•1 day ago

Yeah. There's a lot of normative legal work and theory that's not always great to have peers gatekeeping. I do think, however, that places an extra duty on law profs to weigh in when the ideas are bad and return intellectual fire. What I don't love law reviews doing is publishing empirical work.

anthonymkreis.bsky.social•1 day ago

But, at the same time, judges aren't roving those other journals and just citing things for propositions they want the veneer of legitimacy for. "Oh, T14 Law Review... [doesn't read], cite!] is bad. But that's also on judges. I have a lot of mixed views.

gelbach.bsky.social•1 day ago

I think that's the main thing: partisans gonna partisan, regardless of outlet.

I suspect the apparently willful poor judgment of the @nytopinion.nytimes.com is far more dangerous than the inexperience of 2Ls at any law review. (And I will refrain from rants about how peer review actually works.)

mayasen.bsky.social•1 day ago

oh totally disagree!

Judges put great weight on law reviews

law reviews are cited a lot more in policy relevant rulings searching for “evidence” than the AER, QJE etc

mayasen.bsky.social•1 day ago

Part of that is that *way more* policymakers are lawyers versus economists or political scientists or whatever

jamalgreene.bsky.social•1 day ago

I think @gelbach.bsky.social is skeptical that citation equates to influence. I imagine one could test that by looking to cases of lower political salience (though those may also be less likely to attract opportunistic scholarship).

mayasen.bsky.social•1 day ago

Totally, influence =! citations

But what recent theory or empirical argument from the AER has captured judicial attention?

jamalgreene.bsky.social•1 day ago

I don't think judges typically read empirical econ scholarship, but I think part of the issue with law reviews is the sheer volume of scholarship (and scholars), and the publicity effect of judicial citation. This enables opportunism and gives a judge a lot to pick from.

gelbach.bsky.social•1 day ago

I am indeed *highly* skeptical that judges just don't know what they think about issue A, but then they find a law review article on point, and so they adopt its position, citing it out of duty.

And I'm pretty unsurprised that the AER & QJE aren't widely cited by judges in legal opinions!

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply