University of Richmond Law Review

Editorial Policy

The University of Richmond Law Review seeks to preserve the author’s writing style when editing articles that have been selected for publication. In addition, the Law Review strives to promote an open and close working relationship with all authors. To promote this relationship, the Law Review maintains regular correspondence with authors to update the progress of their articles as well as to resolve any problem that may occur during editing.

As policy, the Law Review edits citations in accordance with the 21st edition of the Uniform System of Citation (“Bluebook” format). Any suggested changes made by the Law Review are approved by the author before the article is deemed ready for publication.

Editorial Process

We begin our editorial process by assigning a Final Editor to each piece. The Final Editor is a member of the Executive Board. The Final Editor performs an initial edit and suggests general changes, such as identifying areas for additional citation. This is a light edit, as the article has yet to go through our cite checking process. The article then goes to the author for an initial author read. This gives the author an opportunity to review and approve any changes we may suggest and answer any questions we have on the frontend. An initial author read is typically one week at the beginning of our editorial process.

After the initial author read, we perform a cite check. Our staff members verify all sources, edit the text of the article for grammar and spelling, and edit the footnotes according to the Bluebook. Next, Article Editors review the work of staff members and make additional edits. A Manuscript Editor then reviews the article with a particular eye towards Bluebook rules and makes additional edits.

The Final Editor then performs the final edit. Reviewing the three prior levels of editing, the Final Editor reads the entire article and makes the final call on suggested edits. The Final Editor strives to promote consistency throughout the article and across the publication as a whole, all while maintaining the author’s individual writing style. The entire process, from cite check to final edit, takes approximately one month.

After the final edit, we send the article to the author for a second author read. This will be the last opportunity to make substantive changes, including changes to the text and footnotes. The second author read is typically one week long.

After the second author read, we review the article to ensure that it conforms with the Bluebook and Chicago Manual of Style. At this stage, any additional edits we make are minimal.

When the article is finalized, we send a final copy to the author for approval. This is a forty-eight-hour review period before the article goes to print.

Once all articles for an issue are complete, we collate them into a page proof—drafts of the articles exactly as they will appear in the published book. The page proof is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and applicable Book Editor, and then sent to our publisher, Joe Christensen, Inc.

The publisher then sends back the articles with any identified corrections as a book proof. This book proof is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and applicable Book Editor. The book proofs are sent back to the publisher, and the publisher incorporates the final changes. The Law Review then receives advance copies of the book. We review the advance copy and then inform the publisher that the book is ready to print.

University of Richmond Law Review Online

We are also online! If you would like to be considered specifically for our online publication, please feel free to send us a message. If we think your piece is well suited for our online publication, we will tailor your offer accordingly.