Follow-Up To Some Recent Posts
Rather than responding within the comments, I thought I would add some thoughts about some recent posts of mine.
1. On whether product liability should be taught as a separate course: The question is not whether the topic is important. The question is whether it is sufficiently distinctive to merit its own class. Negligence is very important, but nobody teaches a course that is just about negligence. I’m not sure why products isn’t just a topic that should be covered as one of many in “Advanced Torts.”
2. On whether law reviews should charge for submissions, if anyone from Boalt or Chicago would like to explain why they have switched from ExpressO to Scholastica, I would invite a guest post on the issue. I’m unclear about whether the problem is: (a) ExpressO’s technology is lousy; or (b) law reviews are getting too many submissions. If the answer is (a), then charging for submissions is no answer.
I’ll throw out one other thought. Perhaps the whole concept of expedited review should be abandoned. I don’t think any book publishers or peer review journals operate that way. It’s clear why expedited review works well for law professors–they can maximize their placements. It used to work well for the lower-ranked journals when there were fewer law reviews, but I’m not sure if that’s still true. But recent law review editors would be in a better position to address that.