A New Opportunity

Scott M. Chludzinski

The Harvard Law & Policy Review can and will provide a forum for progressive debate, merge traditional legal scholarship with twenty-first century media, and help the American Constitution Society grow.

As I ponder the question of what the Harvard Law & Policy Review can be, I reflect on current events and on this summer’s American Constitution Society National Convention.

Lately, news stories have been characterized by despair and divisiveness; the national mood has been grim. Yet as I think back on the convention, I have hope. As an ACS chapter president, I have a unique opportunity to express that hope and to share my thoughts on how we should shape the Review. I have three main suggestions. First and foremost, the publication must capture the spirit and passion of the progressive movement. Second, we much try our best to publish articles that will shape the debate among progressives in the legal and policy worlds. Finally, HLPR should fill the void between traditional, print-bound legal scholarship and modern, electronic modes like blogging.

The opportunity for progressive minds to gather and develop new ideas is as old as the Roman Senate, and as American as the Continental Congress. Today, we have a chance to emulate this spirit with an innovative publication dedicated to the notion of positive change. If the Review can capture that attitude and use it for progressive ends, it will succeed.

With a progressive spirit embodying the Review, what is the next step? I propose that this next step will be taken to develop a cohesive frame for crucial legal and policy debate. It is important to not lose site of the forest, and always to ask: what are the guiding principles we must bring to the national conversation? By providing a medium for substantive debate, and distributing it to the membership, we will be able to realize a sense of progressive unity. Readers across the nation will be better able to articulate progressive ideas in daily discussions. In this way we will refine our arguments and be even more prepared for future conventions.

Finally, I find it imperative to stress the uniqueness of this journal. It is indeed a new market for legal scholarship. There is a gap in the current outlets for legal thought. On one side lie the traditional printed law journals, where scholars spend great time researching and writing on particular areas of concern. On the other end we have new technologies like blogging, satisfying our collective need for immediate information. What is innovative about HLPR is a desire to combine the two approaches. We will be well informed on a variety of issues, achieving both depth of scholarship and breadth of learning.

It is simply a wonderful idea to create an official ACS publication. As we begin, let us do all we can to ensure its success. ACS is growing rapidly and solidifying a crucial position as a participant in the national debate over legal policy. We should view this growth as the beginning of something even greater.

* Scott M. Chludzinski is president of the Indiana University School of Law — Bloomington student chapter of the American Constitution Society.

Preferred citation: Scott M. Chludzinski, A New Opportunity, 1 HARV. L. & POL'Y REV. (Online) (Sept. 18, 2006), http://www.hlpronline.com/2006/07/chludzinski_01.html.