Cardozo Law Review -- Emergency SCOTUS Nomination Issue

Cardozo Law Review is soliciting submissions for a special issue publishing existing or original articles and essays on the nomination and confirmation of a Supreme Court Justice by President Trump in the last days of his first term and prior to the November election. We hope to publish the issue in collaboration with other law reviews and are soliciting support from law reviews interested in collaborating as well.

In 1987, when President Reagan made one of the most controversial nominations to the Supreme Court in American history, Cardozo Law Review rushed to publish an issue collecting legal scholars’ views on Robert Bork’s jurisprudence in order to inform senators voting on his confirmation. Cardozo Law alumna Barbara Olson took boxes of the Cardozo Law Review Bork issue to Washington, D.C. and delivered them to senators. The Senate performed its constitutional duty to offer advice and consent over judicial nominees, and rejected Robert Bork’s confirmation by the widest margin vote in Supreme Court nomination history, 58-42; and the legacy of the Bork hearings and confirmation process persists in the Supreme Court nomination process today.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s recent passing leaves a historic vacancy and another opportunity for a permanent and dramatic precedent to be set for the Supreme Court nomination process. The decision to accelerate the nomination, or halt it until the American people have decided who their next president will be, has the capacity to change the political makeup of the Court for decades to come. Because of the gravity of this historical moment, Cardozo Law Review is interested in publishing a special issue discussing the positions and merits for and against postponing the nomination and confirmation of a new Supreme Court Justice until after the presidential inauguration. 

The goal of the project is to highlight the increasing danger to our democracy wrought by the continued politicization of the Supreme Court. By bringing together law reviews from a diverse range of schools, as well as scholars whose work spans the ideological spectrum, we hope to send a message to those in Congress and the White House: while we may disagree on important issues, we stand united in recognizing that without a neutral judiciary, our tripartite system cannot function as the founders intended. Though we may not succeed in changing the hearts and minds of those in power, we can at least offer a robust and measured counter-argument to the polarization that currently plagues the United States.

We look forward to working with you in this historic moment! Please contact us at cardozo.l.rev@gmail.com with submissions, questions, or interest in collaborating.

Sincerely,