He commented at Prawfs:
I think you picked wisely. The law-review-article-as-amicus-brief is usually a bad idea: Even if someone inside the building sees it, it gets no more weight than an amicus brief, and once the case is over the article is quickly outdated. So it’s a lot of effort for relatively little reward; better to take your time and write something more lasting.
I tried doing this with Pandora, rushing it out the door (in 3 months, pretty damn impressive) before arguments in McDonald. Seemed like a good idea at the time. It was cited in Gura’s briefs. No cite from the court. It’s still pretty relevant, but I think Orin’s point is about right. I’m not sure if I’d do that again.