Like every other academic discipline, the field of law publishes the research of its scholars in disciplinary journals, and that body of writing serves as the primary arena for the explication of the discipline's scholarly work. Yet, two features of law reviews set this body of writing apart from every other academic discipline: first, most of the nation's two hundred–plus law schools publishes at least one such journal (and most larger schools publish multiple journals), producing an incomparably vast publishing realm; and second, nearly all of these publications are controlled by students rather than by academics or professionals in the field. Faculty involvement is minimal, generally limited to an advisory role. Law students alone review, accept, reject, and edit the articles published in their journals, most of which come from law school faculty who, like faculty in other disciplines, seek and obtain promotion, tenure, pay increases, and status within their institutions and profession through their records of publication. Even though this arrangement “turns the academic hierarchy upside down,” it is an old and firmly entrenched feature in the world of law schools. Further, with a few exceptions, article submissions are not subject to the process of blind peer review, meaning that no review or “refereeing” of manuscripts by experts in the field normally occurs. Publishing decisions almost always rest with students alone.