First, have something worthwhile to say. The single most important factor in our acceptance decisions is whether the author is making a useful contribution to legal discussion and thought.
Second, be clear and concise. We are firmly committed to the idea that a piece can simultaneously be thoughtful, clear, and brief. Give only as much background as is necessary for a reader to follow your argument, and make sure that your piece is organized so that it is easy to read. To this end, try to use footnotes sparingly, and keep them brief, as they can be more disruptive to an online reader than they would be in a print publication.
Third, cite your piece to open-access sources, especially sources available on the Internet, as much as possible. We prefer citations that we can follow up with links, enabling our readers to instantly navigate to source material. Also, given that our editing timeline is much faster than a print journal, we find that relying on sometimes lengthy inter-library loans to check sources can bog down the process. If you must cite sources that are not readily available, we prefer that you submit electronic copies of those sources to us for our use in the source-and-cite process.
Fourth, consider writing a critique of previously published scholarship in the Law Review, whether the prior scholarship was in the print journal or NULR Online. We enjoy publishing such pieces, and consider them with special care whenever we receive them.
Finally, consider getting other authors involved in creating a dialogue with you on an interesting topic. We are committed to the idea that interactivity and dialogue are key ways of developing and refining legal ideas. We publish both single-author pieces and multi-person dialogues, but we have a special interest in the latter. We encourage authors to submit a proposal for a dialogue-based set of pieces.