Professor Tamanaha (St. John's) raises the issue here, noting that in order to overcome the non-merit-based nature of editorial review by student-edited law reviews, we need "to come to a collective recognition that the placement of an article is not itself a measure of its quality. Law professors often say this, but deep down they don't really believe it because elite journals have magical names."
I am very interested to hear to what extent readers think this is still accurate. I certainly have colleagues--colleagues whom I highly regard, I should add--who will sometimes say of a job candidate, "Well, she had an article in the Michigan Law Review," as though that meant something (other than that the article will be more widely read than if it were in the Indiana Law Journal), and I am always astounded, and often point out how absurd this is. Some of this is generational: older colleagues are far more likely than younger colleague to cite law review placement in discussing an article. But I am curious about the experience/impressions of others in the legal academy.
As long as your e-mail address and ISP confirm that you are a legal academic, I'll permit anonymous postings here. Post only once, comments may take awhile to appear.