Charleston Law Review – Submissions

The Charleston Law Review is currently published four times a year. The Law Review welcomes articles, essays, and reviews on all legal topics from all legal professionals. The Law Review gives consideration to each author’s submission and makes every effort to provide a prompt review.

The Law Review encourages authors to submit manuscripts electronically. To electronically submit an article, essay, or review please e-mail the document in Microsoft Word format. Authors may also submit via Scholastica.

Submission Requirements:

  • Submit only one, double spaced copy of your manuscript. The Law Review prefers if submissions appear in Microsoft Word format.
  • The Charleston Law Review considers submissions of all lengths, but gives preference to articles of fewer than 32,000 words.
  • Text and citations should conform to A Uniform System of Citation (19th ed. 2010) (“The Bluebook”). Footnotes are preferred over endnotes.
  • Please include current contact information (name, phone number, address, e-mail address) with submitted materials so the Law Review will be able to inform you of the status of your manuscript.
  • Please include a brief abstract of your submission with the text.
  • Please include a resume and biographical information with submitted materials.

Requests for Expedited Review:

Please submit requests for expedited review via e-mail. The author requesting an expedite should include his or her name, phone number, e-mail address, the name of the journal that has offered publication, and the date by which an answer is requested.

Withdrawal of Submission:

If you wish to withdraw your submission from review, please send an e-mail. Please include your name, the title of your submission, and the reason for withdrawal. Please put “Withdraw” in the subject line of the e-mail.


Student Works Issue Submissions:

Only members of the Charleston Law Review are eligible for submission to the Student Works Issue.



Opinions expressed by articles published in the Charleston Law Review reflect those of the author and not necessarily those of the Charleston Law Review.


Read more