Fordham law review

1.7k papers and 4.7k indexed citations i.

About

The 1.7k papers published in Fordham law review in the last decades have received a total of 4.7k indexed citations. Papers published in Fordham law review usually cover Political Science and International Relations (709 papers), Law (583 papers) and Sociology and Political Science (319 papers) specifically the topics of Legal Systems and Judicial Processes (412 papers), Legal Education and Practice Innovations (188 papers) and Law, Rights, and Freedoms (167 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Fordham law review are Rainer Bauböck, David Richards, Susan D. Franck, Ran Hirschl, Deborah L. Rhode, Bernard E. Harcourt, Roberta Romano, Tommie Shelby, Hilary Sommerlad and Jennifer M. Chacón.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Fordham law review

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Fordham law review. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Fordham law review.

Countries where authors publish in Fordham law review

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Fordham law review. 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 papers published in Fordham law review with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Fordham law review more than expected).

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.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025