Date Posted: February 2012
Every year, the tallying of law review circulation numbers presents at least one opportunity to examine the role played by puffery in the world of scholarly law publishing. Last year the result was a gentle needling of the Virginia Law Review. The year before that it was the Harvard Law Review. This year the Stanford Law Review is honored with similar treatment. But first, a few observations about historic lows in law review circulation, and the wide disparities between the experiences of individual journals.