The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Congratulations to My Co-Bloggers on the HeinOnline ScholarRank List
The Top 250 list is an rough measure of recent influence of authors of law review articles, based on citations by articles (especially weighing those in the last 5 years), citations by courts (likewise weighted in favor of the last 5 years), and number of accesses at HeinOnline for the last 12 months. It includes scholars living and dead (#3, for instance, is the great torts scholar William Prosser, who died in 1972). My co-bloggers on the list are:
- Orin Kerr (#11).
- Will Baude (#26).
- Steve Calabresi (#78).
- Randy Barnett (#89).
- Sai Prakash (#113).
- Sam Bray (#136).
- David Kopel (#187).
- Stephen Sachs (#190).
Note that the top 250 are out of the tens of thousands of current and past law professors at U.S. law schools, as well as other law review article authors. Even many top 20 law schools have only a few names on the list (e.g., only four for Georgetown, including Randy). Obviously, the rankings have many limitations—for instance, they don't include citations to books and treatises—and they also vary from month to month; but I thought they were worth noting.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
But Jason Cavanaugh assures us Steve Calabresi is the most useless Volokh Conspirator!
Congratulations Calabresi: You’ve passed Blackman in one fell swoop for most useless contributor.
I'm not paying you rent, so bitch all you want.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4369535-former-federal-judge-luttig-colorado-trump-disqualification/
Why does anyone still consider this piece of shit to be a conservative? Remember, he supports reading the 2nd Amendment out of the Constitution.
I know. The guy merely spent 40 years, issuing deeply and consistently conservative rulings from the bench (ie, where there were actual real-world consequences). But for pro-Trump idiot trolls like you, all with TDS, opposition to Trump = not a real conservative.
It's fine that you have whored your own integrity. You do you.
Defenderz may be an idiot, but his disqualifying factor is opposition to the Second Amendment. He said nothing about Trump.
I also think the "self-executing" theory is in bad faith, but yes, I don't think one can be a real conservative and not believe in the 2nd Amendment.
I suspect that with Luttig, it stems from his father's murder by a feral black with an illegal gun. But a much more logical transformation would have to become anti-black.
How much bigotry -- of various flavors -- would this white, male blog need to publish, cultivate, and celebrate before a reasonable person would conclude that at least some of the law professors who operate this blog are bigots?
If you can't make up your mind, you could ask UCLA for help.
Defenderz, of course, had and has no integrity (and is just a troll anyway).
I don't know who Sai Prakash is, or whether he is a Volokh Conspirator, but as of today I would bet my house (no mortgage) that he is a Federalist Societeer, clinger, and culture war casualty.
Prof. Volokh modestly omits that he himself is number 20 on the list.
Michael W. McConnell at number 29, ostensibly out of an abundance of modesty, or a desire to see him post more often.
I like Michael McConnell's work very much, but he is not actually one of the Conspirators.
It comes to mind that Peter O'Toole played a role in both Caligula and Masada. While the list is interesting -- and many on it are certainly worthy of respect -- repetition of a man's works neither define his character nor reveal the content of his soul: the glory of the Academy is the opportunity to interrogate and challenge the wise.
With AI we should be able to weight citations by how much the author likes them. And a majority cite is better than a concurrence. David Bernstein got cited with approval in a concurrence in the college admissions cases.
Bingo! These fringe right-winger circle-cite each other; show up in Justice Thomas' seething, one-justice, crackpot dissents; and then brag about how often they get cited (and, they hope you will infer, how influential they are).
The token movement conservatives at strong, mainstream law faculties are viewed and treated as irrelevant curiosity pieces. How often does a non-wingnut cite a movement conservative as persuasive or useful authority?
Will Baude is a lot younger than most of those. I think he'll end up near the top soon.
Congrats to no. 20 too. Well done!
Thanks!