The William Nelson Cromwell Foundation offers an annual prize of $5,000 for the best article in American legal history published by an early career scholar. Articles published in 2016 in the field of American legal history, broadly conceived, will be considered. There is a preference for articles in the colonial and early National periods. Articles published in the Law and History Review are eligible for the Surrency Prize and will not be considered for the Cromwell Article Prize.
The Cromwell Foundation makes the final award, in consultation with a subcommittee from the American Society for Legal History. This subcommittee invites nominations for the article prize. Authors are invited to nominate themselves or others may nominate works meeting the criteria that they have read and enjoyed. Please send a brief letter of nomination, no longer than a page, along with an electronic or hard copy of the article, by May 31, 2017, to the subcommittee chair, Mary Ziegler, <email>.
2017 Cromwell Article Prize
Mary Ziegler (2014), Florida State University <email>
Erika Pani (2016), Colegio de México <email>
Daniel Sharfstein (2015), Vanderbilt University <email>
John Witt (2015), Yale University <email>
|2016||Daragh Grant, The Treaty of Hartford (1638): Reconsidering Jurisdiction in Southern New England, William and Mary Quarterly 72 (2015): 461-498.|
|2015||Gregory Ablavsky, “The Savage Constitution,” Duke Law Journal, 63 (Feb. 2014): 999-1089.|
|2014||Nicholas Parrillo, “Leviathan and Interpretive Revolution: The Administrative State, the Judiciary, and the Rise of Legislative History, 1890-1950,” Yale Law Journal 123 (2013): 266-411|
|2013||Justin Driver, “The Constitutional Conservatism of the Warren Court,” California Law Review, 100 (2012): 1101-1167|
|2012||David Freeman Engstrom, “The Lost Origins of American Fair Employment Law: Regulatory Choice and the Making of Modern Civil Rights, 1943-1972,” Stanford Law Review, 63 (2011): 1071-1143|
|2011||Krishanti Vignarajah, “The Political Roots of Judicial Legitimacy: Explaining the Enduring Validity of the Insular Cases,” University of Chicago Law Review, 77 (2010): 781-845|