Hello,
Here is the results from the Evaluating Authority Exercise.
The results are also available on the tab on TWEN titled Blog which is located beneath CALI LessonLinks.
Here were the instructions for the Evaluating Authority Exercise:
Please rank the resources based on their RELATIVE AUTHORITY.
[Note: You are not ranking them based on when you would use them in the research process but rather on their strength as an authoritative resource.]
*********************************************************************************
The Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution is the most authoritative. It is ranked # 1. All 13 class participants ranked the Commerce Clause as the most authoritative resource on the list.
The next source with the next highest number of points (11) and thus ranked by the class as the second most authoritative resource was a federal trial case with citations to the Federal Supplement and the Florida Law Weekly.
There was a tie for the classes’ third most authoritative source at 5 points each. Both American Jurisprudence 2nd and the Rotunda and Nowak, Treatise on Constitutional Law, Substance and Procedure received 5 points each.
The fourth most authoritative resource according to the class with 5 points was Florida Jurisprudence 2d.
The fifth most authoritative resource according to the class was another tie with 3 points each. The tie was between the Bittker and Denning treatise titled Bittker on Regulation of Interstate and Foreign Commerce and Bradford’s Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly article.
The sixth most authoritative resource according to the class with 5 points was the Bittker and Denning treatise also ranked number five (above) in a tie.
The seventh most authoritative resource according to the class was Dan Coenen’s Iowa Law Review article with 4 points.
The eighth most authoritative resource according to the class was Bradford’s Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly article with 5 points.
The ninth most authoritative resource according to the class was Mitchell’s Tulane Environmental Law Journal article with 5 points.
The tenth most authoritative resource according to the class was Coenen’s Turning Point study aid with 3 points.
The eleventh most authoritative resource according to the class was Linda Greenhouse’s article in the New York Times with 5 points.
The twelfth most authoritative resource according to the class was an United States Supreme Court case available on QuizLaw with 5 points.
The least authoritative resource from this list according to the class was the United States Supreme Court case available on QuizLaw with 4 points.
*************************************************************************************
Discussion:
You, I am sure have noticed that there was unanimity in the first choice which was a given and 11 our of 13 agreed on the second ranked authoritative resource, the federal district court case with a citation to the Federal Supplement.
After that, the highest number of agreement was 6 out of 13.
There was also some unanimity at the bottom with both Wikipedia and QuizLaw receiving very low authoritative rankings.
Neither American Jurisprudence 2d nor Florida Jurisprudence 2d should have ranked highly as authoritative sources. They are great research tools usually used early in the research process but not they are not authoritative sources.
Also, Coenen’s title Constitutional: The Commerce Clause is a title in the study aid Turning Point Series. It is certainly useful but it is not an authoritative source. One would not want to cite it to a court, include in a law firm memo, etc.
The treatises written by Nowak and Rotunda and Bittker and Denning are definitely authoritative resources. Nowak, Rotunda, and Bittker are all very respected. Denning collaborated with Bittker and then published the second edition as the sole author and is also respected. However, the most critical part of the equation is the content of the treatise. Is it on point for the legal issue being considered?
The law review articles written by Mank and Coenen, can also be authoritative. How “authoritative” may depend upon how well known the authors are and the publisher of the law reviews. However, the article itself, again, is the most critical piece of the equation. Is it on point for the legal issue being considered?
Mitchell wrote a Note in the Tulane Environmental Law Journal. The designation Note indicates that the author is a law student. A student author may not be considered as authoritative as a lawyer or a professor. However, the article itself is the most critical piece of the equation. Is it on point for the legal issue being considered?
One of the items was an article in the NYT by Linda Greenhouse. She was the United States Supreme Court reporter for the NYT for years. She is very well respected. But a NYT’s article is not usually considered an authoritative piece that one would cite to a court, etc. However, if the article brings out important points that are not available in more authoritative resource, then citing it might make sense.
Please let me know your comments and questions.
Bye.
