Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Trial by Mathematics: Precision and Ritual in the Legal Process
1971343 citationsLaurence H. TribeHarvard Law Reviewprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Laurence H. Tribe
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Laurence H. Tribe's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Laurence H. Tribe with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Laurence H. Tribe more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Laurence H. Tribe
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Laurence H. Tribe. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Laurence H. Tribe. The network helps show where Laurence H. Tribe may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Laurence H. Tribe
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Laurence H. Tribe.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Laurence H. Tribe based on the total number of
citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges
represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together.
Node borders
signify the number of papers an author published with Laurence H. Tribe. Laurence H. Tribe is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Tribe, Laurence H.. (2016). Transcending the Youngstown Triptych: A Multidimensional Reappraisal of Separation of Powers Doctrine. SSRN Electronic Journal.1 indexed citations
2.
Tribe, Laurence H.. (2015). Equal Dignity: Speaking its Name. Harvard Law Review. 129(1). 420–436.5 indexed citations
3.
Tribe, Laurence H.. (2012). The Constitutional Inevitability of Same-Sex Marriage. Maryland law review. 71(2). 471.4 indexed citations
4.
Tribe, Laurence H.. (2007). Death by a Thousand Cuts: Constitutional Wrongs without Remedies after Wilkie v. Robbins. SSRN Electronic Journal.2 indexed citations
5.
Tribe, Laurence H.. (2007). Reflections on Unenumerated Rights. University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 9(2). 483.
Tribe, Laurence H.. (1999). Saenz Sans Prophecy: Does the Privileges or Immunities Revival Portend the Future--Or Reveal the. Harvard Law Review. 113(1). 110–198.1 indexed citations
10.
Tushnet, Mark & Laurence H. Tribe. (1999). The Supreme Court, 1998 Term. Harvard Law Review. 113(1). 26–26.2 indexed citations
Tribe, Laurence H.. (1984). Testimony before the Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights, House Committee on the Judiciary, Regarding H.J. Res. 1: The Equal Rights Amendment.. 19(1). 15–20.1 indexed citations
18.
Tribe, Laurence H., et al.. (1976). When values conflict : essays on environmental analysis, discourse, and decision. DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library).11 indexed citations
19.
Tribe, Laurence H.. (1972). Policy science: Analysis or ideology?. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2(1).145 indexed citations
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive
bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global
research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include
incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and
delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in
Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.