I am referencing the Federal Nursing Home Reform Act in a bibliography. Is this correct:
Federal Nursing Home Reform Act, 42 USC § 1395i–3 (1987).
Thanks in advance for your american lawyerly referencing powerz!
Close. Assuming your style guide instructs you to follow Bluebook form, then you need to fix a few small things. When citing a particular section of a statute, you don’t include the name; it should be “U.S.C.” not “USC;” and you are to cite the latest version of the code if the statute is currently in force (2006, IIRC).
So it should be: 42 U.S.C. § 1395i–3 (2006).
FWIW, I refuse to pull out my Bluebook to double-check, but I’m pretty sure that’s right.
Thanks very much. I use the Australian Guide to Legal Citation but it wasn’t clear on a couple of a points.
I’ve seen Acts of Congress cited by name, especially if it was a well-known law, even in legal briefs. But don’t italicize it.
You say “even in legal briefs” as if they were paragons of good citation form. 
Point taken. Perhaps I should have said (accurately) “even in court decisions.”
I’m not familiar with US legal citation methods, but when I was studying Law at Uni here in Australia I was taught it was Legislation Year (State), Section Numbers.
So, you’d have Kitten Purring Act 2009 (QLD), s42-47.
Just to make it complicated, I was also told it was also OK to put the section first, so you’d have s42-47, Kitten Purring Act 2009 (QLD), but I think it depends on your tutor’s preferences there.
I think what Richard Parker said is on target, BUT, for your purpose I think it would be helpful to the reader if you include the title “Federal Nursing Home Reform Act”.
Sometimes statutes include a section listing how they can be cited (too lazy to look up an example). “This statute may be cited as the Federal One Eyed One Eared Flying Purple People Eater Act” but from what I can tell the Federal Nursing Home Reform Act does not include such a provision.
But I think your bibilography is going to be more helpful to the reader if you include some kind of reference to the title of the act (although the title seems to be an unofficial title, but don’t quote me on that.
So what you could do is do it the way Richard Parker suggested, but then put the title in parentheses after:
42 U.S.C. § 1395i–3 (2006) (“The Federal Nursing Home Reform Act”).
It is common to see “et. seq.” right after the section number if you are referring to an act that is in more than one section. It just means that the section is the first of the act and the act covers some unspecified number of sections after that.
IIRC, no period after the “et” in “et seq.”
I believe the earlier advice on Bluebook formatting to be correct, but this gave me pause. If you’ve been instructed to use the Australian Guide for your assignment, and this is a school thing, you may want to ask your prof about this point. On the other hand, it may not be worth the trouble.
This is correct.
BUT, from what I can tell the statute in question is just this one section. So, based on my quick review anyway, it looks like you should NOT use “et seq.” after the citation.
I wasn’t quite sure on the AGLC’s instructions on how to reference US law. So I took Richard Parker’s advice, but for clarity, added in the name of the act like constantine suggested.
I’ve hit ‘submit’ on the assignment now, all freakin 10,000 words of it. Thanks, all.