Like every academic journal, the Harvard Law Review has rigorous editorial processes governing how it solicits, evaluates, and determines when and whether to publish a piece. An intrinsic feature of these internal processes is the confidentiality of our 104 editors’ perspectives and deliberations. Last week, the full body met and deliberated over whether to publish a particular Blog piece that had been solicited by two editors. A substantial majority voted not to proceed with publication.
More from the Blog
-
Originalism Makes Sense: A Response
A colleague of mine, In Kyu Chung, recently wrote a Blog post titled “A Thought Experiment: Does Originalism Make Sense?” He answers that question...Response To:
-
A Thought Experiment: Does Originalism Make Sense?
Imagine that the people yesterday gathered to draft a new Constitution, which includes a First Amendment that says: “The government shall not abridge the... -
NYT v. OpenAI: The Times’s About-Face
The New York Times has sued OpenAI and Microsoft for the unpermitted use of Times articles to train GPT large language models. The case...