Tuesday, October 22, 2013
Following up on yesterday's post, NY Times: Law Scholarship’s Lackluster Reviews:
- Balkinization: Glass Houses: Liptak on Legal Scholarship, by Frank Pasquale (Maryland)
- Concurring Opinions: In Defense of Law Reviews, by Daniel Solove (George Washington)
- ContractsProf Blog: NYT's Adam Liptak on Lackluster Legal Scholarship (or, On Elephants Swatting Flies), by Meredith R. Miller (Touro)
- Environmental Law Prof: Liptak on Legal Scholarship, by Dave Owen (Maine)
- Faculty Lounge: Reforming Faculty/Student Norms vis-à-vis U.S. Law Reviews, by Jeff Redding (St. Louis)
- Greedy Associates: The Law Review Debate: The Easy Target or Irrelevant Journal?
- Law Prof Blawg: Law Reviews Don't Suck!
- Leiter's Law School Reports: Yet Another News Article Trashing Student-edited Law Reviews, by Brian Leiter (Chicago)
- PrawfsBlawg: Courts and Law Reviews, by Howard Wasserman (Florida International)
- PrawfsBlawg: Et Tu, Adam? The Lazy Critiques of Law Reviews Continue, by Matt Bodie (St. Louis)
- PrawfsBlawg: Getting Law Review Fans Out of the Closet: Liptak on Jacobs and Waxman, by Jack Chin (UC-Davis)
- Simple Justice: Liptak to Law Reviews: Snort My Taint*, by Scott Greenfield
- The Volokh Conspiracy: In Defense of Law Reviews, by Will Braude (Chicago)
- The Volokh Conspiracy: The Relevance and Readership of Student-Edited Law Reviews: Another Response to Liptak, by Orin Kerr (George Washington)