Law Prof Miffed at CJ Roberts' Characterization of Legal Scholarship as Being Irrelevant

Quoting from the Concurring Opinions post, Sherrilyn Ifill on What the Chief Justice Should Read on Summer Vacation:

[M]ore often than not, published law review articles offer muscular critiques on contemporary legal doctrine, alternative approaches to solving complex legal questions, and reflect a deep concern with the practical effect of legal decisionmaking on how law develops in the courtroom.

Now, perhaps Maryland law prof Sherrilyn Ifill can explain why courts aren't sufficient persuaded by such deeply concerned academic muscularity to cite law review articles in court opinions.

You can view CJ Roberts presentation at the Annual Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Conference on C-Span. [JH]