YANML but... help?

November 8, 2013 11:27 PM

I need to cite this, 20 USC § 2891, but it was omitted from USC. How do I denote that?

This is not for a legal document, but for a paper. I need to do an in text citation of this omitted part of the USC. Help!

posted by tweedle to Law & Government (5 answers total)

A little more context is necessary, I think. For what purpose do you need to cite this section? If you are citing it for the purpose of quoting the original text, as it existed prior to repeal, you can cite to the session law, and to the code, but you must also note that the section has been repealed and is now omitted from the code.

Disclaimer: I am terrible at legal citation, and usually make an intern do it for me.
posted by ereshkigal45 at 12:18 AM on November 9, 2013

Which citation style are you using (Chicago, APA, etc)?
posted by orrnyereg at 3:01 AM on November 9, 2013

Cite to the National and Community Service Act of 1990, not to the code. Remember that the code is a codification of what the law says and evidence of the law, not the law itself, which is in the acts actually passed by Congress. So it is not necessary to cite to the code and in policy discussions, it is standard to cite to the Act in question, which tells the reader what the law is about.

Why is this ommitted? I've always seen these buggers and never understood how it could have a code section (be codified) and then be omitted from the code.
posted by Ironmouth at 4:19 AM on November 9, 2013 [1 favorite]

Also, was this code section superceded and repealed? Reading up on it, I see that the program created by the Act was revamped 3 years later. Be sure you have that part figured out.
posted by Ironmouth at 4:30 AM on November 9, 2013

law school paper or humanities paper? dunno if this is universal, but my humanities profs weren't super formalistic about citations. as long as the footnote is useful and the information apparent, it'll suffice. I'd do what Ironmouth said: cite the section of the public law, maybe add "(originally codified at 20 USC whatever)" and call it a day. you just want to provide a roadmap to checking sources, and that's adequate.

re: omission: the code is supposed to be useful. I'm in tax, and in the code every day. if I had to check the notes for every section to see if it's still in force, it'd be a nightmare.
posted by jpe at 6:43 AM on November 9, 2013