In a recent essay titled "Against the Law Reviews," Judge Richard Posner says law review articles are "too long, too dull, and too heavily annotated." The reason? He blames the law-student editors.
There's certainly some merit in his point of view. But I really liked the thoughtful response from Micah at Crooked Timber: "Don't Blame the Law Students: A Reply to Posner." If you have any interest at all in the debate about law-student editors, be sure to check it out. (Thanks to Abnu for the heads up.)
Meanwhile, Professor Leiter (who thinks he's Friedrich Nietzsche, by the way) also weighs in, boldly proclaiming that law-student editors possess "no real scholarly or intellectual skills." Not only that, but they're also responsible for all the worst developments in legal scholarship "over the past thirty years."
Leave it to a law professor to place the blame for poor legal scholarship on someone other than the professors whose names appear on the articles. I wonder what Professor Bainbridge would say. (Meanwhile, I must admit that Nietzsche-infatuation or not, Leiter's always an entertaining read.)