Unlike Bob, I don't find the whole endeavor demeaning, offensive
or elitist.  The question of quality is a bona fide question, and
deserves a thoughtful answer.  I have to say I'm apalled by the
methodology suggested by Laura's school, if only because it
does not take the culture of legal scholarship into account in
anything but the most superficial way.  Of course some journals
are "better" than others in that some journals will publish anything
at all, no matter how silly, badly written or poorly researched.
On the other hand, the selection criteria of some "better" journals
are frequently erratic, unclear or downright stupid.
 
Now that I think about it, the desire of a committee to have a list
of "approved" journals is a way of avoiding the difficult task of
evaluating the scholarship by actually reading it.  That's the
real danger -- that the identity of the journal will become
a substitute for a thoughtful assessment of the work.
 
 
Ken