The Docket: Submissions
The Buffalo Law Review invites responses to any article or response published in the last two years. It is the Editorial Board's position that the timely dissemination of Docket pieces is crucial to promoting scholarly discourse. Accordingly, the Buffalo Law Review requests that all responses be lightly footnoted, no longer than 4000 words, and limited in scope to matters addressed in articles published in the Review or other journals, in responses submitted to The Docket, or shorter original works. Responses must conform to the Eighteenth Edition of The Bluebook and The Chicago Manual of Style.
Please submit responses to the firstname.lastname@example.org, with the subject line "Response to [article title here]" or "Response to [forum piece title here]". Authors should also submit a curriculum vitae in addition to the article. Review of responses submitted will be conducted by the Executive Editor and an Articles Editor. We will notify authors of selection for publication in the Forum within a week of submission. We cannot, unfortunately, respond to each submission. The Forum may feature multiple responses to a single article, and we welcome authors to submit responses on a rolling basis so as to create a robust dialogue.
Responses appearing in The Docket are featured on the Review's website as Adobe PDF files. They are also available on the Lexis and Westlaw databases.
Citation Format for Responses in The Docket:
John Doe, Response Title, 58 Buff. L. Rev. Docket 1, 1 (2010), www.buffalolawreview.org/docket/content/58/author.pdf.
The International Arbitration Club of New York awarded Professor Charles H. Brower II the Smit-Lowenfeld Prize for best scholarly article in the field of international arbitration for his article "Arbitration and Antitrust: Navigating the Contours of Mandatory Law," which appeared in the December 2011 issue of the Buffalo Law Review.
Todd E. Pettys's article Judicial Retention Elections, the Rule of Law, and the Rhetorical Weaknesses of Consequentialism, 60 Buff. L. Rev. 69 (2012), has generated a lot of discussion:
- The Press-Citizen Editorial Board agrees with Pettys, saying "Iowa’s current judicial nominating system ... all but ties the hands of judges from defending themselves."
- Jordan M. Singer reflected on the uncertain future of judicial retention elections in BLR's The Docket.
- Pettys's article was featured in an editorial, "Judges Need to Learn to Defend Themselves," in the Iowa City Press-Citizen.
Should NCAA players unionize in an effort to get paid? A Union of Amateurs: A Legal Blueprint to Reshape Big-Time College Athletics by Nick Fram and Thomas Frampton presents surprising research regarding state-level paths to player unionization and pay. A recent article in Salon, "Madness of March: NCAA Gets Paid, Players Don’t," relies heavily on their cutting edge research to suggest an avenue to empower student-athletes: "Rather than corrupting 'amateurism,' Fram and Frampton argue, unionization offers a path to preserve its best aspects: protecting the league from legal crisis while providing players a forum to defend their academic pursuits and their physical and emotional health."