The Supreme Court Review

466 papers and 2.4k indexed citations i.

About

The 466 papers published in The Supreme Court Review in the last decades have received a total of 2.4k indexed citations. Papers published in The Supreme Court Review usually cover Law (248 papers), Political Science and International Relations (202 papers) and Sociology and Political Science (165 papers) specifically the topics of Judicial and Constitutional Studies (135 papers), Law, Rights, and Freedoms (128 papers) and Legal and Constitutional Studies (106 papers). The most active scholars publishing in The Supreme Court Review are George J. Stigler, Mary Anne Case, Cass R. Sunstein, Daniel D. Polsby, Alexander Meiklejohn, Frank H. Easterbrook, Douglas G. Baird, Frederick Schauer, Robert K. Rasmussen and Harry Kalven.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in The Supreme Court Review

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in The Supreme Court 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 The Supreme Court Review.

Countries where authors publish in The Supreme Court Review

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in The Supreme Court 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 The Supreme Court Review with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites The Supreme Court 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