This article was accepted into the corpus but its outbound wikilinks were never NER-processed — typical at the deepest BFS hop or when the run's entity cap was reached. No expansion funnel to show.
| Kansas Law Review | |
|---|---|
| Title | Kansas Law Review |
| Discipline | Law |
| Former names | University of Kansas Law Review |
| Abbreviation | Kans. Law Rev. |
| Publisher | University of Kansas School of Law |
| Country | United States |
| Frequency | Quarterly |
| History | 1952–present |
Kansas Law Review The Kansas Law Review is a student-edited legal journal published at the University of Kansas School of Law in Lawrence, Kansas; it publishes scholarship on United States constitutional issues, administrative law, civil rights, property, contracts, and comparative law. Influential in academic and practice circles, the journal has hosted contributors from the Supreme Court, federal judiciary, state courts, executive agencies, and international tribunals. The Review has engaged with topics touching on the First Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, Administrative Procedure Act, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and treaties affecting interstate commerce and civil liberties.
Established in the mid-20th century, the journal traces origins to student editorial projects at the University of Kansas Law School and to regional legal periodicals that flourished after World War II. Early issues featured commentary on decisions from the United States Supreme Court, analyses of statutes enacted by the United States Congress, and notes responding to rulings from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, Kansas Supreme Court, and federal district courts. Over decades the Review published symposia addressing landmark cases like Brown v. Board of Education, Miranda v. Arizona, and issues arising from legislation such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Faculty editors and alumni with ties to institutions including Harvard Law School, Yale Law School, Columbia Law School, Georgetown University Law Center, and Stanford Law School helped expand its national profile.
The Review's mission emphasizes rigorous analysis of judicial opinions and statutory interpretation, engaging scholars from across the United States and abroad. It solicits submissions on topics linked to constitutional doctrine shaped by cases like Roe v. Wade, United States v. Nixon, Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., and on administrative practice governed by the Administrative Procedure Act and decisions from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. The journal publishes pieces concerning criminal procedure influenced by Gideon v. Wainwright and Katz v. United States, property law touching on rulings from the Iowa Supreme Court and California Supreme Court, and comparative analyses involving the European Court of Human Rights, International Court of Justice, and tribunals such as the World Trade Organization dispute panels.
Managed by a board of student editors with faculty advisory oversight from the University of Kansas School of Law, the Review operates a selection process based on academic performance and writing competition results similar to those used by journals at University of Chicago Law School, New York University School of Law, University of Pennsylvania Law School, and Duke University School of Law. Each issue includes lead articles by established scholars, practitioner essays by members of entities like the Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission, and state attorney general offices, and student notes addressing decisions from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, and state appellate courts. Production and citation conform to standards comparable to those recommended by the Bluebook and editorial practices at the Harvard Law Review, Yale Law Journal, and Michigan Law Review.
The Review has hosted symposia and special issues on themes reflecting national debates, featuring contributions referencing cases such as Bush v. Gore, District of Columbia v. Heller, and Obergefell v. Hodges. Past symposia examined federalism with contributors from scholars connected to University of Virginia School of Law, Notre Dame Law School, and University of Texas School of Law, and practitioners from offices like the Solicitor General of the United States, state public defenders, and corporate counsel from firms appearing before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Notable articles have discussed executive power in the context of events involving the Watergate scandal and legislative responses like the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, administrative regulation tied to decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada, and civil rights litigation shaped by precedents from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Alumni of the Review have gone on to clerk for judges on the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court, and to hold positions at institutions including the Department of Justice, American Civil Liberties Union, Federal Communications Commission, and multinational law firms litigating before the Supreme Court of the United States and international arbitral tribunals. Graduates have joined faculties at University of Michigan Law School, Cornell Law School, Boston University School of Law, and practiced in firms engaged in cases under statutes like the Sherman Antitrust Act and regulatory matters involving the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Review's articles are indexed in legal databases and academic indexes alongside journals such as the Columbia Law Review, California Law Review, and Georgetown Law Journal, and are discoverable through citation services covering publications that cite decisions from the United States Supreme Court, federal appellate courts, and state supreme courts. Back issues and current content are cataloged in university libraries including the Library of Congress, the University of Kansas libraries, and repositories that collect legal scholarship for research on precedent, statutory interpretation, and comparative jurisprudence.