Bluebook Exam Questions With All
Correct Answers 2025 Latest Update
Three typical components of a legal citation CORRECT ANSWERS (1) Signal (2)
Source or Authority (3) Parenthetical Information
"The Whitepages" CORRECT ANSWERS the portion of The Bluebook with rules for
academic writing (ex. law review articles, research papers, etc.)
"The Bluebook Pages" CORRECT ANSWERS the portion of The Bluebook with rules
for normal lawyers and practitioners -- it contains some deviations from "The
Whitepages" -- used for briefs, motions, memoranda, and opinions
Placement of citation in a document CORRECT ANSWERS For NON-ACADEMIC work,
citation is placed right in the text after the proposition being supported. Footnotes are
only used if the rules in a specific jurisdiction ask for them
Two ways to insert a citation in a sentence CORRECT ANSWERS (1) as a standalone
sentence (2) as a "citation clause"
Citation Sentence CORRECT ANSWERS The citation essentially is its own sentence
Ex.
The Supreme Court has the power to invalidate statutes that are repugnant to the U.S.
Constitution. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 177-79 (1803) (federal laws);
Fletcher v. Peck, 10 U.S. (6 Cranch) 87, 139 (1810). The Supreme Court also has the
power to review state court decisions. Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 14 U.S. (1 Wheat.)
304, 377-78 (1816) (civil cases).
Citation Clause CORRECT ANSWERS This citation is inserted as an interruption in a
sentence -- the interruption begins and ends with a comma -- the citation immediately
follows the proposition to which it relates -- do NOT begin a citation clause with a capital
letter UNLESS citation starts w a source that should be capitalized -- do NOT use a
period UNLESS the citation is the FINAL clause of the sentence.
This citation style is good for citing an authority that only supports a proposition in PART
of a sentence
Ex. The Supreme Court adopted a broad reading of the Commerce Clause during the
New Deal, see Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111, 128-29 (1942), though in recent years
the Supreme Court has reined in its broad reading somewhat, see United States v
Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 624 (1995).
,"Signal" CORRECT ANSWERS A shorthand message about relationship between
PROPOSITION and SOURCE/AUTHORITY cited for that proposition -- note that these
are probably not ever going to be capitalized when part of a CITATION CLAUSE
Different Signals CORRECT ANSWERS (1) No Signal --- the authority directly states
the proposition
(2) E.g., --- the authority is one of multiple authorities directly stating the same
proposition
(3) Accord --- the authority is one of multiple authorities directly stating or supporting the
proposition, AND one of the other authorities was mentioned in the proposition
(4) See --- The authority supports, but does not state, a proposition.
(5) See also -- The authority provides additional material supporting the proposition
(6) Cf. --- the authority is different from the main proposition but sufficiently analogous to
lend support
(7) Compare. . . [and]. . . with. . . [and]. . . --- The authorities are similar or different in
important respects
(8) Contra --- the authority states a proposition contrary to the main proposition
(9) But see --- the authority CLEARLY states a proposition CONTRARY to the main
proposition
Ex. "Estelle provides a meaningful protection for prisoners' rights. See 429 U.S. 97, 104
(1976). But see Joel H. Thompson, Today's Deliberate Indifference: Providing Attention
without Providing Treatment to Prisoners with Serious Medical Needs, 45 HARV. C.R.-
C.L. L. REV. 635 (2010) (arguing that in practice Estelle does little to protect prisoners'
rights)."
^^Explanation: But see is used to indicate that the article suggests, without directly
stating, that Estelle protection is not actually meaningful. Though the article does not
directly state that Estelle is not meaningful, it notes that few prisoners can actually
benefit under Estelle due to a variety of factors. From this the reader can readily infer
that Estelle may not be a meaningful protection.
(10) But cf. --- the authority supports a proposition analogous to the CONTRARY of the
main proposition
Ex. "Arachnophobia, a crippling, irrational fear of spiders, cannot qualify
, When using more than one type of citation signal in a sentence CORRECT ANSWERS
the signals should appear (together with the authorities they introduce) in the following
order:
1. no signal
2. e.g.
3. accord
4. see
5. see also
6. cf.
7. compare. . . [and]. . . with. . . [and]. . .
8. contra
9. but see
10. but cf.
11) see generally
Separating authorities CORRECT ANSWERS use semicolons
Listing authorities CORRECT ANSWERS GENERALLY, use the most helpful ones first,
but the rules do get more specific. For instance, these authorities should be cited in the
following order:
1. Constitution (first federal, than state, then foreign)
2. Statutes (first federal, than state, then foreign)
3. Federal cases (in order of descending authority)
4. State cases (alphabetically by state, of descending order of authority WITHIN states)
5. Legislative material (first bills, then hearings, then reports, then debates)
6. Administrative materials (first executive orders, then regulations, then proposed rules)
7. Court documents (first records, then briefs, then petitions)
8. Secondary materials (first restatements, then books, then articles, then internet
sources)
Explanatory parenthetical CORRECT ANSWERS a parenthetical at the end of an
authority explaining why it is relevant --- this goes BEFORE subsequent history --- these
should begin with a present participle (i.e. "ing") unless the parenthetical contains
quoted materials (ex. "finding that. . . ", "explaining that. . .", "requiring that. . ." etc.) --
do not begin w capital letters or end w periods UNLESS parenthetical consists of a
quote that is a full sentence
Ex. "See Flanagan v. United States, 465 U.S. 259, 264 (1984) (explaining that the final
judgment rule reduces potential for parties to "clog the courts" with time consuming
appeals). "
Ex. "Alt. Richfield Co. v. Fed. Energy Admin., 429 F. Supp. 1051, 1061-62 (N.D. Cal.
1976) ("Not every person aggrieved by administrative action is necessarily entitled to
the protections of due process.").
Correct Answers 2025 Latest Update
Three typical components of a legal citation CORRECT ANSWERS (1) Signal (2)
Source or Authority (3) Parenthetical Information
"The Whitepages" CORRECT ANSWERS the portion of The Bluebook with rules for
academic writing (ex. law review articles, research papers, etc.)
"The Bluebook Pages" CORRECT ANSWERS the portion of The Bluebook with rules
for normal lawyers and practitioners -- it contains some deviations from "The
Whitepages" -- used for briefs, motions, memoranda, and opinions
Placement of citation in a document CORRECT ANSWERS For NON-ACADEMIC work,
citation is placed right in the text after the proposition being supported. Footnotes are
only used if the rules in a specific jurisdiction ask for them
Two ways to insert a citation in a sentence CORRECT ANSWERS (1) as a standalone
sentence (2) as a "citation clause"
Citation Sentence CORRECT ANSWERS The citation essentially is its own sentence
Ex.
The Supreme Court has the power to invalidate statutes that are repugnant to the U.S.
Constitution. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 177-79 (1803) (federal laws);
Fletcher v. Peck, 10 U.S. (6 Cranch) 87, 139 (1810). The Supreme Court also has the
power to review state court decisions. Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 14 U.S. (1 Wheat.)
304, 377-78 (1816) (civil cases).
Citation Clause CORRECT ANSWERS This citation is inserted as an interruption in a
sentence -- the interruption begins and ends with a comma -- the citation immediately
follows the proposition to which it relates -- do NOT begin a citation clause with a capital
letter UNLESS citation starts w a source that should be capitalized -- do NOT use a
period UNLESS the citation is the FINAL clause of the sentence.
This citation style is good for citing an authority that only supports a proposition in PART
of a sentence
Ex. The Supreme Court adopted a broad reading of the Commerce Clause during the
New Deal, see Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111, 128-29 (1942), though in recent years
the Supreme Court has reined in its broad reading somewhat, see United States v
Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 624 (1995).
,"Signal" CORRECT ANSWERS A shorthand message about relationship between
PROPOSITION and SOURCE/AUTHORITY cited for that proposition -- note that these
are probably not ever going to be capitalized when part of a CITATION CLAUSE
Different Signals CORRECT ANSWERS (1) No Signal --- the authority directly states
the proposition
(2) E.g., --- the authority is one of multiple authorities directly stating the same
proposition
(3) Accord --- the authority is one of multiple authorities directly stating or supporting the
proposition, AND one of the other authorities was mentioned in the proposition
(4) See --- The authority supports, but does not state, a proposition.
(5) See also -- The authority provides additional material supporting the proposition
(6) Cf. --- the authority is different from the main proposition but sufficiently analogous to
lend support
(7) Compare. . . [and]. . . with. . . [and]. . . --- The authorities are similar or different in
important respects
(8) Contra --- the authority states a proposition contrary to the main proposition
(9) But see --- the authority CLEARLY states a proposition CONTRARY to the main
proposition
Ex. "Estelle provides a meaningful protection for prisoners' rights. See 429 U.S. 97, 104
(1976). But see Joel H. Thompson, Today's Deliberate Indifference: Providing Attention
without Providing Treatment to Prisoners with Serious Medical Needs, 45 HARV. C.R.-
C.L. L. REV. 635 (2010) (arguing that in practice Estelle does little to protect prisoners'
rights)."
^^Explanation: But see is used to indicate that the article suggests, without directly
stating, that Estelle protection is not actually meaningful. Though the article does not
directly state that Estelle is not meaningful, it notes that few prisoners can actually
benefit under Estelle due to a variety of factors. From this the reader can readily infer
that Estelle may not be a meaningful protection.
(10) But cf. --- the authority supports a proposition analogous to the CONTRARY of the
main proposition
Ex. "Arachnophobia, a crippling, irrational fear of spiders, cannot qualify
, When using more than one type of citation signal in a sentence CORRECT ANSWERS
the signals should appear (together with the authorities they introduce) in the following
order:
1. no signal
2. e.g.
3. accord
4. see
5. see also
6. cf.
7. compare. . . [and]. . . with. . . [and]. . .
8. contra
9. but see
10. but cf.
11) see generally
Separating authorities CORRECT ANSWERS use semicolons
Listing authorities CORRECT ANSWERS GENERALLY, use the most helpful ones first,
but the rules do get more specific. For instance, these authorities should be cited in the
following order:
1. Constitution (first federal, than state, then foreign)
2. Statutes (first federal, than state, then foreign)
3. Federal cases (in order of descending authority)
4. State cases (alphabetically by state, of descending order of authority WITHIN states)
5. Legislative material (first bills, then hearings, then reports, then debates)
6. Administrative materials (first executive orders, then regulations, then proposed rules)
7. Court documents (first records, then briefs, then petitions)
8. Secondary materials (first restatements, then books, then articles, then internet
sources)
Explanatory parenthetical CORRECT ANSWERS a parenthetical at the end of an
authority explaining why it is relevant --- this goes BEFORE subsequent history --- these
should begin with a present participle (i.e. "ing") unless the parenthetical contains
quoted materials (ex. "finding that. . . ", "explaining that. . .", "requiring that. . ." etc.) --
do not begin w capital letters or end w periods UNLESS parenthetical consists of a
quote that is a full sentence
Ex. "See Flanagan v. United States, 465 U.S. 259, 264 (1984) (explaining that the final
judgment rule reduces potential for parties to "clog the courts" with time consuming
appeals). "
Ex. "Alt. Richfield Co. v. Fed. Energy Admin., 429 F. Supp. 1051, 1061-62 (N.D. Cal.
1976) ("Not every person aggrieved by administrative action is necessarily entitled to
the protections of due process.").
