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
-
The Second Amendment’s Liberal Moment
The Second Amendment was designed to protect the people and the states from a tyrannical and unrepresentative central government. Excavating this history today is... -
From Destruction to Construction: The Case for a New Congressional Review Act
Congress doesn’t do anything anymore. Despite Republican control of the House, the Senate, and the presidency, Congress seems to be fading into the background of the current political landscape. At the... -
Systemic Prioritization in Negotiation and the Law
I. Introduction Negotiation lies at the heart of legal practice — yet even highly trained negotiators regularly reach suboptimal agreements. This problem is widespread....