Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2023
Abstract
A potent myth of legal academic scholarship is that it is mostly meritocratic and mostly solitary. Reality is more complicated. In this Article, we plumb the networks of knowledge co-production in legal academia by analyzing the star footnotes that appear at the beginning of most law review articles. Acknowledgments paint a rich picture of both the currency of scholarly credit and the relationships among scholars. Building on others’ prior work characterizing the potent impact of hierarchy, race, and gender in legal academia more generally, we examine the patterns of scholarly networks and probe the effects of those factors. The landscape we illustrate is depressingly unsurprising in basic contours but awash in details. Hierarchy, race, and gender all have substantial effects on who gets acknowledged and how, what networks of knowledge co-production get formed, and who is helped on their path through the legal academic world.
Recommended Citation
Price, W. Nicholson, II, Keerthana Nunna, and Jonathan Tietz. "Hierarchy, Race & Gender in Legal Scholarly Networks." Stanford Law Review 75 (2023): 71-136.
Included in
Law and Gender Commons, Law and Race Commons, Legal Profession Commons, Legal Writing and Research Commons