The Texas Law Review welcomes article submissions from judges, academics, and practicing lawyers. The Texas Law Review does not accept submissions from current law students.
We accept both hard-copy submissions and electronic submissions via ExpressO. We strongly prefer to receive electronic submissions that are uploaded as editable word documents (e.g., .doc or .docx rather than .pdf). Hard-copy submissions may be addressed to:Texas Law Review
Chief Articles Editor
727 E. Dean Keeton
Austin, TX 78705
Expedite requests should be made through ExpressO. Expedite requests for hard-copy submissions may be made by emailing email@example.com. Unfortunately, due to a high volume of submissions, we are not always able to respond to each expedite request.
The Texas Law Review is committed to publishing the best legal scholarship. In connection with this goal, the Texas Law Review, along with journals at Columbia, Cornell, Duke, Georgetown, Harvard, Michigan, Stanford, U. Penn., Virginia, and Yale, endorses the statement reproduced below. We emphasize, however, that we do not impose a limit on the length of articles that we consider. Rather, we are committed to the nondiscriminatory review of articles—there is no absolute maximum or minimum length necessary for review or publication by the Texas Law Review. We believe quality legal scholarship can be found in both long and short articles, and our past practice bears this out. We endorse this statement as a step toward removing the perception that the Texas Law Review actively seeks out and publishes only long articles.
Joint Statement Regarding Article Length
In mid-December, the Harvard Law Review conducted a nationwide survey of law faculty regarding the state of legal scholarship. Nearly 800 professors completed the survey and submitted their feedback. Complete tabulations of the survey will soon be available on the web. Importantly, the survey documented one particularly unambiguous view shared by faculty and law review editors alike: the length of articles has become excessive. In fact, nearly 90% of faculty agreed that articles are too long. In addition, dozens of respondents submitted specific comments, identifying the dangers of this trend and calling for action. Survey respondents suggested that shorter articles would enhance the quality of legal scholarship, shorten and improve the editing process, and render articles more effective and easier to read.
The law reviews listed above are very grateful for the constructive feedback and wish to acknowledge a role in contributing to this unfortunate trend in legal scholarship. To the extent that the article selection or editing process encourages the submission and publication of lengthier articles, each of the law reviews listed above is committed to rethinking and modifying its policies as necessary. Indeed, some have already done so. The vast majority of law review articles can effectively convey their arguments within the range of 40–70 law review pages [which translates approximately to 20,000 to 35,000 words, including footnotes], and any impression that law reviews only publish or strongly prefer lengthier articles should be dispelled. Ultimately, individual law reviews will have to decide for themselves how best to resolve these concerns. Please know, however, that editors across the country are cognizant of the troubling trend toward longer articles and are actively exploring how to address it.
For more information, you may contact us by e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.