Skip to main content

Law & Society Review: Call for Virtual Special Issues

Law & Society Review:  Call for Virtual Special Issues
The Law & Society Review anticipates producing several virtual special issues over the next three volume years (2020–2022).  A virtual special issue comprises a collection of articles that have already been published in Law & Society Review, as well as a newly-written introduction by the special issue editor or editorial team. Virtual special issues are showcased on the journal website; articles included in the issue remain open access for 2-6 months.
Reasons you might want to propose a virtual special issue include:
  • To highlight a puzzle, important unanswered question, or gap in research (perhaps one you are working on right now…)
  • To energize a conversation about a topic, issue or question (perhaps one you are or may soon be writing about…)
  • To showcase the relevance of law and society research to an issue of contemporary importance
  • To draw together seemingly disparate work and explain why law and society scholars should think about it a new way
  • To have an opportunity to try out new ideas and see what responses those ideas receive
To propose an issue for consideration, submit to a proposal of no more than three pages that includes:
  1. The virtual special issue’s theme and title
  2. The names and qualifications of the editor or editorial team
  3. Why a virtual special issue on this theme would be interesting, and to whom
  4. A brief outline of the points you plan to raise in your introduction
  5. Your plan for promoting the issue while it is available on line
  6. A list of 4–7 articles and/or book reviews previously published in Law & Society Review that you propose to include in the virtual special issue. While you may draw your selections from any issue published from 2003 to the present (the period for which the current publisher, Wiley, maintains the archive), at least one of the articles should have been published within the previous 12 months.
Proposals are accepted on a rolling basis.  Virtual special issues will be selected by the Law & Society Review editorial board. Questions? Write to

Popular posts from this blog

What Courts do with Executive Privilege Claims

By Gbemende Johnson, Hamilton College

“Because Congress requires this material in order to perform our constitutionally-mandated responsibilities, I will issue a subpoena for the full report and the underlying materials.” This was the response of House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) after receiving the redacted 448-page Report on the Investigation Into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.The battle over the Mueller Report is just one example of conflicts between Congress and the executive branch over executive privilege, where agency officials claim they can withhold documents. Many disputes land in federal court. The Obama Administration Department of Justice spent years in court defending its claim of executive privilege over documents related to the ATF’s “Fast and Furious” gunwalking operation. Federal courts have proven less likely to let cabinet level agencies like the Department of Justice withhold documents than they are with independent agencies li…

Switching Up the Metaphor: from Baseball to Knitting

Susan M. Sterett, University of Maryland, Baltimore County

Metaphors guide what we see. In studying law and courts, metaphors for the law have come from baseball: Justice Roberts famously said in his confirmation hearing that judges call balls and strikes. Justice Kavanaugh followed his lead. Although umpires argued the analogy misunderstands the creativity the job requires, it remains a common metaphor for judging. The valuable website Oyez asks on each Supreme Court justice’s biography which baseball player is most like the justice’s contribution to the law. It’s an incomprehensible question for those who don’t follow men’s professional baseball closely. It also points to justices, and individual achievement, as the key players in law. Others are spectators.

What would show up if instead an activity often dismissed as trivial, mechanistic and feminine—knitting (and I want to include crochet; for brevity I’ll sum up both with knitting)—were the metaphor for the law instead? 

How do text messages complicate contemporary sexual assault adjudication?

By Heather Hlavka and Sameena Mulla 
Department of Social and Cultural Sciences, Marquette University

“There’s no video, no injury. It’s purely one hundred percent ‘he said, she said.’ They had a terrible relationship. They were nasty to each other and they don’t get along well, probably never will. But there is no evidence to support the state’s case, other than their words.” Our article, “’That’s How She Talks’: Animating Text Message Evidence in the Sexual Assault Trial,” begins with these familiar words offered by a defense attorney during a sexual assault trial in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The oft-invoked trope of “he said, she said” in cases of sexual violence suggests that without third-party eye witness testimony or material evidence, sexual assault allegations rest on conflicting reports provided by victims, the accused, and other witnesses. But how do trial attorneys reinvent this trope when the words of the witnesses are preserved as text messages?

Text messages are recorded co…