Skip to main content


Image result for law and society review




Call for Symposia

Due Date:  Friday, September 25, 2020


The Law & Society Review seeks proposals for themed symposia to appear in late volume 55 and volume 56, which will appear in print in later 2021 and 2022. The Review is particularly interested in symposia focused around issues of current significance, such as COVID-19, voting rights, the rise of fascism, and struggles for racial justice, as well as a variety of other themes within law and society scholarship and substantive areas of focus.  

Symposia will feature 3-5 articles clustered around a shared theme, and will be edited by guest editors. Editors may work alone or in teams.  Proposals should come from scholars who wish to serve as symposium editors. Proposals will be selected on a competitive basis.

Criteria for evaluation will include the significance and potential impact of the collected scholarship, innovation in subject matter or method, and collaborations that seek to include early-career scholars and members of groups underrepresented in the academy.


About the Law and Society Review

Law &  Society Review is a peer-reviewed interdisciplinary journal publishing work bearing on the relationships between society and law, legal processes, and legal phenomena. Articles in the Review are engaged with and motivated by theory and draw on any of the diverse methodological approaches from the social sciences broadly construed.


About peer review for symposia articles

All submitted manuscripts will go through double-blind peer review, with reviewers chosen by symposium editors in consultation with the Editorial Board of the Review. The guest editors, in consultation with the Review’s Editorial Board, will determine the acceptance of manuscripts for publication in the symposium. An invitation to prepare a symposium does not constitute a guarantee of publication of either the symposium or of the individual articles submitted in connection with it.  

Peer review is a time-consuming process. Few papers eventually published in the Review are accepted at initial submission. Most articles published have been “revised and resubmitted”: sent back to the journal for a second round of peer review after authors revised their initial submission in response to comments and questions from a first group of anonymous reviewers. Symposium editors should start early, plan well ahead and expect several months to pass between initial receipt of manuscripts for review and eventual publication.


Submitting a symposium proposal

Proposals should be 2-4 pages in length and should address the following:

1.                   The theme of the symposium and a proposed title

2.                  Why the theme is significant and important

3.                  Why a symposium focusing on the theme is necessary or likely to have

            substantial impact

4.                  Who will edit the symposium and their qualifications to do so

5.                  How authors and articles will be selected to submit to the symposium: by

invitation, through an open call, or a combination of the two

6.                  A list of potential authors and/or articles


Please direct any questions to Rebecca L. Sandefur, Editor (volumes 54-56), For consideration, proposals should be submitted by September 25, 2020 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…

Inviting Papers for a Symposium on Immigration Detention

Law & Society Review Symposium: Facing Immigration Detention Revised Submission Deadline: February 15, 2020

Immigration detention is one of the most pressing civil and human rights issues of our time that affects millions of migrants around the world. The theme of this special symposium issue, Facing Immigration Detention, is understanding the causes, conditions, and consequences of immigration detention around the world. This Special Issue is dedicated to advancing public knowledge about how immigration detention has expanded, its role in immigration enforcement, its societal impacts, and its intersections with the criminal justice system. The Special Issue seeks to bring together innovative research that will guide the next generation of detention studies and inform policy debates in this area.  

To be considered, the work must engage with theory, offer empirical analysis, and make clear contributions to socio-legal studies. Possible topics include, but are not limited to:
Causes of…

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?