When I first started teaching in 1994, IL scholars making unsolicited submissions to flagship journals often had the experience of getting an acceptance from a journal they hadn’t even submitted to, as main-journal editors walked submissions down the hall to their IL-journal counterparts. That may still be happening some of the time, but it’s clear that main journals at the top schools are now interested in publishing IL pieces where they once were not – yet more evidence of the end of IL’s marginalization within the legal academy. And while it’s true that a number of the more recent pieces are in effect anti-international law (with revisionists such as John Yoo and Eric Posner well represented in the 2004-06 list) that doesn’t detract from the point – if IL’s worth attacking, and those attacks are being well-placed, there must be something interesting going on.
IL in Flagship Journals, 1994-96
1. Copyright (c) 1996 The Trustees of The University of Pennsylvania University of Pennsylvania Law Review, April, 1996, 144 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1377, 28157 words, ARTICLE: ROLE MODELS AND THE POLITICS OF RECOGNITION, Adeno Addis *
2. Copyright (c) 1995 The Trustees of The University of Pennsylvania University of Pennsylvania Law Review, JUNE 1995, 143 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1889, 41151 words, ARTICLE: COMPARATIVE JURISPRUDENCE (I): WHAT WAS IT LIKE TO TRY A RAT?, WILLIAM EWALD *
3. Copyright (c) The Harvard Law Review Association 1995. Harvard Law Review, February, 1995, 108 Harv. L. Rev. 801, 55338 words, ARTICLE: IS NAFTA CONSTITUTIONAL? *, Bruce Ackerman ** and David Golove ***
4. Copyright (c) 1995 The Columbia Law Review Columbia Law Review, March, 1995, 95 Colum. L. Rev. 223, 45406 words, ARTICLE: THE PRIVATIZATION-NATIONALIZATION CYCLE: THE LINK BETWEEN MARKETS AND ETHNICITY IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, Amy L. Chua *
5. Copyright (c) 1996 Northwestern University Law Review Northwestern University Law Review, Winter, 1996, 90 Nw. U.L. Rev. 658, 29640 words, ARTICLE: TRADE WITHOUT VALUES, Philip M. Nichols *
… LL.M. (foreign and international law) Duke University. This Article was …
6. Copyright (c) 1995 Georgetown Law Journal Georgetown Law Journal, July, 1995, 83 Geo. L.J. 2131, 37867 words, ARTICLE: An Economic Analysis of Trade Measures to Protect the Global Environment., HOWARD F. CHANG * *
7. Copyright (c) 1995 Cornell Law Review Cornell Law Review, July, 1995, 80 Cornell L. Rev. 1331, 48550 words, ARTICLE: LOSERS, FOOLS & PROPHETS: JUSTICE AS STRUGGLE, Jules Lobel *
8. Copyright (c) 1996 Texas Law Review Texas Law Review, May, 1996, 74 Tex. L. Rev. 1301, 28493 words, ARTICLE: The Structure of International Taxation: A Proposal for Simplification, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah *
9. Copyright (c) 1995 University of Chicago University of Chicago Law Review, Spring, 1995, 62 U. Chi. L. Rev. 607, 33634 words, ARTICLE: Treaty-Based Intervention: Who Can Say No?, David Wippman *
10. Copyright © Vanderbilt University 1994. Vanderbilt Law Review, OCTOBER, 1994, 47 Vand. L. Rev. 1441, 20399 words, ARTICLE: Federalism’s Future in the Global Village., Barry Friedman *
… governments: “[t]he kind of international law making envisioned by the …
11. Copyright (c) 1995 Duke Law Journal Duke Law Journal, March, 1995, 44 Duke L.J. 829, 37848 words, ARTICLE: TRADE LEGALISM AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THEORY: AN ANALYSIS OF THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION, G. Richard Shell *
12. Copyright (c) 1995 Duke Law Journal Duke Law Journal, March, 1995, 44 Duke L.J. 928, 18783 words, ARTICLE: RACIAL JUSTICE IN THE AGE OF THE GLOBAL ECONOMY: COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT AND GLOBAL STRATEGY, Anthony D. Taibi *
IL in Flagship Journals, 2004-2006
1. Copyright (c) 2004 The Trustees of The University of Pennsylvania University of Pennsylvania Law Review, December, 2004, 153 U. Pa. L. Rev. 675, 32383 words, ARTICLE: WAR EVERYWHERE: RIGHTS, NATIONAL SECURITY LAW, AND THE LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT IN THE AGE OF TERROR, Rosa Ehrenreich Brooks+
2. Copyright (c) 2005 The Harvard Law Review Association Harvard Law Review, April, 2005, 118 Harv. L. Rev. 1867, 29635 words, ARTICLE: EXECUTING THE TREATY POWER, Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz*
3. Copyright (c) 2006 The Yale Law Journal Company The Yale Law Journal, May, 2006, 115 Yale L.J. 1490, 28996 words, ARTICLE: Good Governance at the Supranational Scale: Globalizing Administrative Law, DANIEL C. ESTY
4. Copyright (c) 2006 The Yale Law Journal Company The Yale Law Journal, May, 2006, 115 Yale L.J. 1564, 43147 words, ARTICLE: Law’s Migration: American Exceptionalism, Silent Dialogues, and Federalism’s Multiple Ports of Entry, JUDITH RESNIK
5. Copyright (c) 2006 The Columbia Law Review Columbia Law Review, May, 2006, 106 Colum. L. Rev. 830, 40022 words, ARTICLE: THE SAFE-CONDUCT THEORY OF THE ALIEN TORT STATUTE, Thomas H. Lee*
6. Copyright (c) 2005 The Columbia Law Review Columbia Law Review, October, 2005, 105 Colum. L. Rev. 1681, 35221 words, ARTICLE: TORTURE AND POSITIVE LAW: JURISPRUDENCE FOR THE WHITE HOUSE, Jeremy Waldron*
7. Copyright (c) 2005 The Columbia Law Review Columbia Law Review, October, 2005, 105 Colum. L. Rev. 1751, 48944 words, ARTICLE: THE BANALITY OF GOOD: ALIGNING INCENTIVES AGAINST MASS ATROCITY, Mark Osiel*
8. Copyright (c) 2005 Michigan Law Review Michigan Law Review, October, 2005, 104 Mich. L. Rev. 1, 31714 words, ARTICLE: THE TRANSFORMATION OF WORLD TRADE, Joost Pauwelyn*
9. Copyright (c) 2004 The Columbia Law Review Columbia Law Review, October, 2004, 104 Colum. L. Rev. 1492, 39792 words, ARTICLE: THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF INTERNATIONAL DELEGATIONS, Edward T. Swaine*
10. Copyright (c) 2004 The Columbia Law Review Columbia Law Review, November, 2004, 104 Colum. L. Rev. 1765, 57248 words, ARTICLE: THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES AS QUASI-INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL: RECLAIMING THE COURT’S ORIGINAL AND EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OVER TREATY-BASED SUITS BY FOREIGN STATES AGAINST STATES, Thomas H. Lee*
11. Copyright (c) 2005 Northwestern University Law Review Northwestern University Law Review, Winter, 2005, 99 Nw. U.L. Rev. 539, 33629 words, ARTICLE: Collective Violence and Individual Punishment: The Criminality of Mass Atrocity, Mark A. Drumbl*
12. Copyright (c) 2004 Northwestern University Law Review Northwestern University Law Review, Summer, 2004, 98 Nw. U.L. Rev. 1567, 21264 words, ARTICLE: THE PRESIDENT’S POWER TO DETAIN “ENEMY COMBATANTS”: MODERN LESSONS FROM MR. MADISON’S FORGOTTEN WAR, Ingrid Brunk Wuerth *
13. Copyright (c) 2005 California Law Review California Law Review, January, 2005, 93 Calif. L. Rev. 1, 36040 words, ARTICLE: Judicial Independence in International Tribunals Judicial Independence in International Tribunals, Eric A. Posner+ and John C. Yoo++
14. Copyright (c) 2005 California Law Review California Law Review, January, 2005, 93 Calif. L. Rev. 75, 45996 words, ARTICLE: Guilty Associations: Joint Criminal Enterprise, Command Responsibility, and the Development of International Criminal Law Guilty Associations: Joint Criminal Enterprise, Command Responsibility, and the Development of International Criminal Law, Allison Marston Danner+ and Jenny S. Martinez++
15. Copyright (c) 2005 Georgetown Law Journal Georgetown Law Journal, January, 2005, 93 Geo. L.J. 487, 39061 words, ARTICLE: Mediating Norms and Identity: The Role of Transnational Judicial Dialogue in Creating and Enforcing International Law, MELISSA A. WATERS *
16. Copyright (c) 2005 Georgetown Law Journal Georgetown Law Journal, March, 2005, 93 Geo. L.J. 939, 27673 words, ARTICLE: How International Rules Die, MICHAEL J. GLENNON *
17. Copyright (c) 2005 Georgetown Law Journal Georgetown Law Journal, March, 2005, 93 Geo. L.J. 993, 16121 words, ARTICLE: Optimal War and Jus Ad Bellum, ERIC A. POSNER & ALAN O. SYKES *
18. Copyright (c) 2005 Georgetown Law Journal Georgetown Law Journal, August, 2005, 93 Geo. L.J. 1885, 30299 words, ARTICLE: The Death of Good Faith in Treaty Jurisprudence and a Call for Resurrection, MICHAEL P. VAN ALSTINE *
19. Copyright (c) 2004 Georgetown Law Journal Georgetown Law Journal, August, 2004, 92 Geo. L.J. 1057, 36312 words, ARTICLE: Whose Justice? Reconciling Universal Jurisdiction with Democratic Principles, DIANE F. ORENTLICHER *
20. Copyright (c) 2006 Cornell Law Review Cornell Law Review, January, 2006, 91 Cornell L. Rev. 303, 25690 words, ARTICLE: WORLD HABEAS CORPUS, Vicki C. Jackson+
21. Copyright (c) 2006 Cornell Law Review Cornell Law Review, January, 2006, 91 Cornell L. Rev. 497, 21724 words, ARTICLE: THE LIMITS OF HABEAS JURISDICTION AND THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR, James E. Pfander+
22. Copyright (c) 2006 Cornell Law Review Cornell Law Review, January, 2006, 91 Cornell L. Rev. 573, 14651 words, ARTICLE: COURTS AT WAR, John Yoo+
23. Copyright (c) 2005 Virginia Law Review Association Virginia Law Review, May, 2005, 91 Va. L. Rev. 579, 41387 words, Article: A FOREST WITH NO TREES: THE SUPREME COURT AND INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE 2003 TERM, John K. Setear*
24. Copyright (c) 2005 Virginia Law Review Association Virginia Law Review, November, 2005, 91 Va. L. Rev. 1579, 24284 words, ARTICLE: EXITING TREATIES, Laurence R. Helfer*
25. Copyright (c) 2004 Cornell Law Review Cornell Law Review, November, 2004, 90 Cornell L. Rev. 97, 48604 words, ARTICLE: IS THE PRESIDENT BOUND BY THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS?, Derek Jinks+ & David Sloss++
26. Copyright (c) 2004 Minnesota Law Review Minnesota Law Review, November, 2004, 89 Minn. L. Rev. 71, 32318 words, ARTICLE: “Willful Blindness” to Gender-Based Violence Abroad: United States’ Implementation of Article Three of the United Nations Convention Against Torture, Lori A. Nessel+
27. Copyright (c) 2005 Minnesota Law Review Minnesota Law Review, June, 2005, 89 Minn. L. Rev. 1591, 40818 words, ARTICLE: Foreign Affairs and the Jeffersonian Executive: A Defense, Saikrishna B. Prakash+ and Michael D. Ramsey++
28. Copyright (c) 2004 New York University Law Review New York University Law Review, December, 2004, 79 N.Y.U.L. Rev. 2029, 52081 words, ARTICLE: BETWEEN DIALOGUE AND DECREE: INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF NATIONAL COURTS, Robert B. Ahdieh*
29. Copyright (c) 2006 University of Chicago University of Chicago Law Review, Spring, 2006, 73 U. Chi. L. Rev. 487, 25784 words, ARTICLE: International Law: A Welfarist Approach, Eric A. Posner+
30. Copyright (c) 2005 University of Chicago University of Chicago Law Review, Spring, 2005, 72 U. Chi. L. Rev. 469, 27224 words, ARTICLE: Between Power and Principle: An Integrated Theory of International Law, Oona A. Hathaway+
31. Copyright (c) 2005 University of Chicago University of Chicago Law Review, Fall, 2005, 72 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1159, 13597 words, ARTICLE: Failed States, or the State as Failure?, Rosa Ehrenreich Brooks +
32. Copyright (c) 2004 University of Chicago University of Chicago Law Review, Summer, 2004, 71 U. Chi. L. Rev. 729, 32398 words, ARTICLE: Using Force, John Yoo +
33. Copyright (c) 2006 Vanderbilt University Vanderbilt Law Review, January, 2006, 59 Vand. L. Rev. 1, 31248 words, ARTICLE: When Courts Make Law: How the International Criminal Tribunals Recast the Laws of War, Allison Marston Danner*
34. Copyright (c) 2006 Vanderbilt University Vanderbilt Law Review, January, 2006, 59 Vand. L. Rev. 69, 35182 words, ARTICLE: Procuring Guilty Pleas for International Crimes: The Limited Influence of Sentence Discounts, Nancy Amoury Combs*
35. Copyright (c) 2005 Duke Law Journal Duke Law Journal, October, 2005, 55 Duke L.J. 75, 32509 words, ARTICLE: POLITICAL TRIALS IN DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL LAW, Eric A. Posner+
36. Copyright (c) 2004 Duke Law Journal Duke Law Journal, December, 2004, 54 Duke L.J. 621, 31550 words, Article: HOW TO INFLUENCE STATES: SOCIALIZATION AND INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW, Ryan Goodman + and Derek Jinks + +
37. Copyright (c) 2004 Duke Law Journal Duke Law Journal, December, 2004, 54 Duke L.J. 705, 28145 words, Article: CRYSTAL EASTMAN AND THE INTERNATIONALIST BEGINNINGS OF AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES, John Fabian Witt +
38. Copyright (c) 2005 Duke Law Journal Duke Law Journal, March, 2005, 54 Duke L.J. 1143, 49908 words, ARTICLE: INSTITUTIONAL SETTLEMENT IN A GLOBALIZING JUDICIAL SYSTEM, Ernest A. Young +
39. Copyright (c) 2005 The Regents of the University of California UCLA Law Review, October, 2005, 53 UCLA L. Rev. 1, 12896 words, ARTICLE: Roper v. Simmons and Our Constitution in International Equipoise, Roger P. Alford*
40. Copyright (c) 2005 The Regents of the University of California UCLA Law Review, February, 2005, 52 UCLA L. Rev. 639, 39247 words, ARTICLE: In Search of a Theory for Constitutional Comparativism, Roger P. Alford*
This reinforces my informal perception of what is happening . . . which must mean it’s right! You might consider excluding general law reviews at schools that do not (or did not) have an international journal (as was true for Chicago), or which had only a specialized journal focusing on trade, economic law, or something like that (this might affect Penn, Northwestern, and Minnesota, and perhaps others). Also, I would be tempted to exclude articles on foreign relations topics. As to the marginalization point, I guess it depends on what you mean. I imagine (though I have no data whatsoever to back this up) that international law pieces found homes in international journals in large part because folks elected to submit to them, perhaps after having had a hand in founding them, and not only because their submissions were walked across the halls. Now it seems that more pieces are being published in general law reviews, but that’s at least in part because folks are submitting to them (I can’t imagine that international journals are passing their submissions to the general law reviews, at least not routinely). So was any marginalization at least partly self-imposed? Perhaps a follow-up post could… Read more »
Guilty as charged. As an articles editor at one of the flagship journals (Stanford) from 1998-99, I can confirm that I did, in fact, walk certain articles down the hall to my friends at the international journal. Even as the token “internationalist” on the articles board, I felt that some articles were just too narrow for the main journal. (Maybe I’m a self-loathing internationalist!) Of course, now that the tables are turned, I get a bit peaved when a journal tells me they have forwarded my article to their international review down the hall. As to Ed’s question, at my institution, I have been told explicitly on more than one occasion that publication in speciality journals is risky pre-tenure. There is no particular logic to it, as far as I can tell, just tradition and a sense that it may be hard to convince the university-wide tenure committee of the value of a secondary journal. I suspect there are similar attitudes on other faculties. This may mean accepting an offer from the main journal of a lower-ranked school (which doesn’t make it into Peter’s statistics) in lieu of placing at the international journal of a flagship school.
Peggy’s experience isn’t unique, I suspect, and changes one’s appreciation of the situation. One gloss on Peter’s observation might be, in effect, “Isn’t it wonderful that general law reviews are grasping that international issues are legitimate and of interest to everyone” — which might be an indicator of de-marginalization. The more negative spin would be that good international work can be published in general law reviews, so that international types can no longer make the argument that their work really belongs by publishing convention in specialty journals. I think the truth lies somewhere between: some good work is published in general law reviews, and some equally good work finds its way into specialty journals (because of authorial preference or practices at the general law reviews, either one of which may be influenced by whether it’s really a “core” international question). Using placement in one kind of publication as opposed to the other is an even weaker signal of quality than relative placement among general law reviews is for non-international sorts. This may mean that the word “flagship” is kind of misleading, to the extent it is understood to connote anything about the status of the crew. And we can cite… Read more »
As one of the current article editors at Hastings Law Journal, which have that interesting problem as well. For us, there’s no question that matters concerning transnational law have become probably the most interesting area of the law (but I’m probably coming from a biased perspective on that though). The problem though, is that we feel inclined to stop publishing articles on transnational law once we’ve reached our “quota.” That is to say, since we aren’t a International Law Journal, but the flagship journal, we feel obligated to publish articles on a variety of topics. So technically there could be a number of articles on international issues which might warrant publication over articles on contract or tax matters.
You know, I would warrant a guess that if you asked any incoming law school class what they dream of doing, those who said “international law” would garner the majority.
I asked a couple of students of mine here at American University, on the main law review and on the international law review. They both mentioned a kind of informal arrangement that sent international or comparative pieces to the international journal – in part because, students from both journals said, the main journal shouldn’t cut out the international journal from good pieces in its field. The probably correct assumption being that the main journal carried more prestige and would get, in a match between the two, the best articles. So there might be a bit of an altruistic reason on the part of the main journal not to hog the top international stuff at least at some schools. We are, after all, the kindler, gentler law school!
Ed and Peggy’s comments reminded that Roger had the post I’ve now linked to above. My impression is that there was a time in which various pressures – tenure-related and otherwise – were pushing IL scholars to place in flagship journals, so that the poor showing there wasn’t a matter of choice but rather of marginalization. But the pendulum may be swinging back, as Roger’s post suggests. Where IL folks once would have taken an acceptance at a second-tier main journal rather than a top IL journal, I think the reverse is now more the case – an acceptance with Harvard, Yale, or Virginia’s IL journal will trump all but a top-15 main journal acceptance, and an increasing number are foregoing the main journals altogether in favor of AJIL and EJIL. In any case, nice to be able to play in both worlds.
oytkgkqa
ldfxjwmb sfpbfjgq fdeprnjxdi