The Lewis & Clark Law Review (LCLR) is a general-purpose law review publishing original scholarship from across the legal academy.
First founded as the Journal of Small and Emerging Business Law in 1996, and rededicated with a broader mission in Spring 2004, LCLR has quickly established itself as a top-100 journal. In the latest Washington & Lee citation rankings, LCLR ranked in the top 5% of all journals.
Call for Papers
(September 1, 2020) Nationwide protests in response to the death of George Floyd have highlighted the importance of criminal justice reform that is sensitive to the needs of Black and other racial minority communities. Previous years have seen some reform measures implemented, and more radical calls for defunding and abolishing the police have entered the mainstream, but how have previous reform efforts played out? Clearly more work needs to be done, but we can learn from the work that has gone before, both in terms of past successes and past failures.
Lewis & Clark Law Review is publishing an issue examining the history of racially sensitive criminal justice reform. Topics may include, but are certainly not limited to:
- Drug Court
- Reformist prosecutors
- Citizen’s Review Committees
- Updating criminal law based on modern science
- Sentencing guideline reforms
- The role of police unions in accountability
- Addiction and the Constitution
- Re-Entry Court
- Reforms grounded in social science
- Diversion programs
- Plea offers
Our current issue, Volume 24 / Number 3 / 2020, is now available online, featuring articles by Shirley Lin, Kate Evans & Robert Koulish, Niva Elkin-Koren & Maayan Perel, Mercer Bullard, Gabe Feldman, and Robert W. Emerson & Lawrence J. Trautman. This issue also features a Lecture by Donald B. Ayer, as well as Notes by Marc Mohan and Sophia von Bergen.
Recent Print Volume Releases:
(June 4, 2020) The second Spring 2020 issue of the Lewis & Clark Law Review, Volume 24 / Number 2 / 2020, is available online, featuring articles by D. Theodore Rave & Zachary D. Clopton, David Marcus, David L. Noll, Lynn A. Baker & Stephen J. Herman, Joshua P. Davis & Brian J. Devine, Alexandra D. Lahav, Elizabeth J. Cabraser & Adam N. Steinman, Robert G. Bone, Gerson H. Smoger, Judith Resnick & Stephenie Garlock & Annie J. Wang, Brian T. Fitzpatrick, and Arthur R. Miller & Robert Klonoff. This issue also features a Note by Zachary T. Nelson. Follow this link to access these articles: Volume 24, Number 2
(Mar. 6, 2020) The first Spring 2020 issue of Lewis & Clark Law Review, Volume 24 / Number 1 / 2020, is available online, featuring articles by Matthew Steilen, Brian Libgober, Ira Steven Nathenson, Tonya L. Brito, Stephen A. Plass, Humberto Briceño León, as well as Notes and Comments by Christopher Fobes and Colleen Muñoz. Follow this link to access these articles: Volume 24, Number 1
Recent Online Article Releases:
August 6, 2020 // Volume 24.3.
SKY-HIGH BILLBOARDS & URBAN COMPUTING: PUBLIC REALM NORMS AND ZONING CRITERIA FOR TOWER FAÇADE DISPLAYS
by Michael N. Widener
March 17, 2020 // Volume 24.2.
ASKING TOO MUCH: THE NINTH CIRCUIT’S ERRONEOUS REVIEW OF SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY DETERMINATIONS
by Stephen Smith
November 6, 2019 // Volume 24.1.
THE RECKLESS MISAPPLICATION OF VOISINE TO THE ARMED CAREER CRIMINAL ACT
by Brooks Kern
The 2020 Summer Citation Competition is now closed. An announcement will be made when the 2021 citation competition is open and available for your review.
A Word About Copyright
Unless a particular piece in the Lewis & Clark Law Review indicates otherwise, the author of each piece in the review has granted all interested readers the right to reproduce and distribute multiple copies of the piece for classroom use in classes at institutions of higher education. This grant is applicable so long as (1) copies are distributed only to students enrolled in the class, (2) no fee, other than a per page copying charge, is paid by the students, (3) the author and the Lewis & Clark Law Review are identified on each copy, and (4) copyright notice is affixed to each copy.
The views expressed by authors in the Lewis & Clark Law Review do not necessarily reflect those of the review’s Editorial Board.