One interesting development in legal scholarship over the last 10 years or so is the increasing importance and prominence of legal blogs as a source of academic commentary. And one measure (a minor one, to be sure, but an interesting one) of the success of legal blogs in affecting legal academic commentary and discussion is the growing frequency of their citations in traditional law reviews. I am surely not the first to make these observations, and doubtless other legal blogs have been cited in law reviews more times than has our relatively young Center for Law and Religion Forum, which is 3 years old. Still, here are the Forum’s citations in the law reviews over its life:

1. Andrew Koppelman, “Freedom of the Church” and the Authority of the State, 21 J. Contemp. Legal Issues 145 (2013).

• FN 95: “Steven D. Smith, How Important is Public Support for Religious Freedom?, Center for Law and Religion Forum, July 16, 2012, http://clrforum.org/2012/07/16/ how-important-is-public-support-for-religious-freedom-2-2/).”

2. Jed Glickstein, Should the Ministerial Exception Apply to Functions, Not Persons?, 122 Yale L.J. 1964 (2013).

• FN 85: “For more on this point, see Mark L. Movsesian, Clergy Libel Suits and the Limits of Hosanna-Tabor, Center for L. & Religion F. (Sept. 24, 2012), http://clrforum.org/2012/09/24/clergy-libel-suits-and-the-limits-of-hosanna-tabor.”

3. Marie A. Failinger, Twenty-Five Years of Law and Religion Scholarship: Some Reflections, 30 Touro L. Rev. 9 (2014).

• FN 4: “Center for L. and Religion F., http://clrforum.org (last visited Jan. 6, 2014).”

4. Elizabeth A. Clark, Liberalism in Decline: Legislative Trends Limiting Religious Freedom in Russia and Central Asia, 22 Transnat’l L. & Contemp. Probs. 297 (2013).

• FN 95: “Mark L. Movsesian, Copycats, Ctr. for L. & Religion Forum (Aug. 25, 2012),http://clrforum.org/2012/08/25/copycats (noting arrest of copycat protesters who interrupted service in cathedral in Cologne, Germany).”

5. Michael A. Helfand, Religion’s Footnote Four: Church Autonomy As Arbitration, 97 Minn. L. Rev. 1891 (2013).

• FN 134: “Michael Helfand, The New Footnote Four?, Center for L. & Religion (May 25, 2012), http://clrforum.org/2012/05/25/the-new-footnote-4/ (arguing that footnote four of Hosanna-Tabor undermines the jurisdictional approach to the religious clauses)”

6. Frederick Mark Gedicks & Rebecca G. Van Tassell, RFRA Exemptions from the Contraception Mandate: An Unconstitutional Accommodation of Religion, 49 Harv. C.R.-C.L. L. Rev. 343, 344 (2014).

• FN 142: “See, e.g., Marc DeGirolami, On the Claim that Exemptions from the Contraception Mandate Violate the Establishment Clause, Center for L. & Religion F. (Dec. 5, 2013), http://clrforum.org/2013/12/05/on-the-claim-that-exemptions-from-the-contraception-man date-violate-the-establishment-clause/, archived at http://perma.cc/7GJ4-9CPJ .”

7. Bruce Ledewitz, Experimenting with Religious Liberty: The Quasi-Constitutional Status of Religious Exemptions, 6 Elon L. Rev. 37 (2014).

• FN 297: “See Mark L. Movsesian, Circumcision Controversies, ST. JOHN’S CTR. FOR L. & RELIGION FORUM (July 10, 2012), http://clrforum.org/2012/07/10/circumcision-controversies/ .”
• FN 370: “See Marc O. DeGirolami, Corporate Exercise of Religion and Other Thoughts on the RFRA Claim in the Mandate Litigation, ST. JOHN’S CTR. FOR L. & RELIGION FORUM (Aug. 1, 2012), http://clrforum.org/2012/08/01/corporate-exercise-of-religion-and-other-thoughts-on-the-rfra-claim-in-the-mandate-litigation/ .”

8. Perry Dane, Natural Law, Equality and Same-Sex Marriage, 62 Buff. L. Rev. 291 (2014).

• FN 148: “See Perry Dane, The Parsonage Exemption and Constitutional Glare, Center for L. and Religion F., (Nov. 27, 2013), http://clrforum.org/2013/11/27/parsonage-exemption/ .”