Pub. L. No. statute format on Bluebook

army-jag341

I am trying to figure out how to use Bluebook citation style to cite a statute referring to specific sections. For instance,  The Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, Pub. L. No. 94-473, 98 Stat. 1976 (1984). I entered "Pub. L. No. 94-473, 98 Stat. 1976" into the code field to make this work.

However, to cite a section from 1005(a) and 2138-39, the string output citations should look like this: Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, Pub. L. No. 94-473, § 1005(a), 98 Stat. 1976, 2138-39 (1984). Do you have a field recommendation for putting "§ 1005(a)" and "2138-39" in their proper places?

Thank you very much!

army-jag341

Hi there, hope you guys are doing great. With the holidays, I Just wanted to briefly follow up on this question so it does not fall through the cracks. Thank you and have a great day!

adamsmith

Where is the "§ 1005(a)" coming from in the first place? It seems odd that'd get inserted in the middle of the string you have in the code field, or am I misunderstanding what's happening?

army-jag341

The "§ 1005(a)" is the section of the public law where the part I am citing is and "2138-39" are the pages where the section I a citing are.

adamsmith

Ah got it, sorry, I misread your post -- it looks like the style currently doesn't even try to render legislation properly. To save me some time, could you lay out the most common ways (US) legislation would be cited in Bluebook? My recollection is that it's not always with Public Law Number, right?

army-jag341

Not at all. It is confusing and that is even if you know what you are doing so you are in good company. As always, it is not a straightforward answer.

When citing the statute at large, for the first time when there is a short title or popular name associated with it: Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, Pub. L. No. 98-473, tlt. II, 98 Stat. 1976 (1984). However, you may also cite this way if referring to a specific section of the statute: 18 U.S.C. 924(c).

Zotero has fields for: Code, Code Number, Public Law Number, and Pages, which I would fill out like this
Code: Stat.
Code Number: 98
Public Law Number: 98-473, tlt. II
Pages: 1976

I added test numbers § 123 and 455 here: | § 123 | 455 | … to see their positioning and here is what I got: Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, 98 Stat. 1976 § 123 (1984) 455.

So, it appears that the code does not use the “Public Law Number” line. When I add the entire string to that field like this: “98-473, tlt. II, 98 Stat. 1976” then the result is: Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, § 123 (1984) 455.

Does that make sense?

adamsmith

When you use Chicago Manual of Style (e.g. 17th edition) does that look right for that item? And how would subsequent citations look? Just "Comprehensive Crime Control Act"?

army-jag341

I am not sure in Chicago, but in Bluebook, it would just reference the first citation using "supra note XYZ." Then, for specific sections, one would have to use the U.S.C. format instead. So, it appears that the circumstances where one would cite a specific section using the Pub. L. No. format like I did (§ 123 and 455) are not a lot. However, the note I made regarding the Code, Code Number, Public Law Number, and Pages fields is still valid.

I wonder whether the workaround to cite using Pub. L. No. and Stat. is to add the whole thing into the Public Law Number or if there will be an update allowing for the Code, Code Number, Public Law Number, and Pages fields to be populated accordingly?

Thank you so much!

adamsmith

Sorry, I was asking how the citation for the item entered as you suggest above looks when you use Zotero's built in Chicago Manual style (which does try to correctly cite legislation and follow bluebook style). If that's correct, getting it into the BB style is basically just copy&paste

army-jag341

Ok, sorry for the confusion. I tried one statute citation putting the whole string in the Public Law Number field and another distributing it as I explained earlier. Here is what I got:

Chicago (author-date):
(Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 1984) in italics
AND
(Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 1984) in italics

Chicago (full note): This one seems to be the only one that shows a variation between the two by including the section symbol on its own.
“Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984,” Pub. L. No. 98-473, tlt. II, 98 Stat. 1976 § (1984).
AND
“Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984,” Pub. L. No. 98-473, tlt. II, 98 Stat. 1976 (1984).

Chicago (note):
Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984.
AND
Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984.

Is this what you needed?