Maryland law review

920 papers and 2.9k indexed citations

About

The 920 papers published in Maryland law review in the last decades have received a total of 2.9k indexed citations. Papers published in Maryland law review usually cover Political Science and International Relations (374 papers), Law (294 papers) and Sociology and Political Science (173 papers) specifically the topics of Legal Systems and Judicial Processes (217 papers), American Constitutional Law and Politics (94 papers) and Law, Rights, and Freedoms (86 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Maryland law review are James G. Titus, Marc Galanter, Duncan Kennedy, Jeremy Waldron, Lauren E. Willis, Donald N. Bersoff, Kenneth S. Abraham, Paul C. Weiler, David B. Wilkins and Richard S. Miller.

In The Last Decade

Maryland law review

290 papers receiving 1.2k citations

Fields of papers published in Maryland law review

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Maryland 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 Maryland law review.

Countries where authors publish in Maryland law review

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Maryland 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 Maryland 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 Maryland 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
2026