Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› hlr-sources-and-bluebook
hlr-sources-and-bluebook
GitHub用于哈佛法律评论文章的权威引用规范，涵盖蓝皮书第22版格式、权威性分级及精确页码标注。适用于脚注起草、引用排序及格式一致性检查，确保符合学术标准。
触发场景
起草或修改具有教义学重要性的脚注
不确定应引用哪些权威或引用顺序
引用格式不一致（如信号词、短形式、 pinpoint）
准备稿件以通过学生编辑的引文核查
安装
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill hlr-sources-and-bluebook -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "hlr-sources-and-bluebook",
"description": "Use when citing authority in a Harvard Law Review (HLR) piece — pinpoint citations, the authority hierarchy, and The Bluebook (which HLR co-publishes). Governs how sources are cited and weighted; it does not build the footnote apparatus end-to-end (hlr-footnotes-and-cite-check) or write the prose."
}
Sources and Bluebook (hlr-sources-and-bluebook)
HLR is one of the four student journals that publish The Bluebook (with the Columbia Law Review, the University of Pennsylvania Law Review, and the Yale Law Journal). Citations are not an afterthought here — they are the connective tissue of the argument, and they will be checked line by line. This skill governs which authority you cite, how much it counts, and how it is formatted to Bluebook standard. HLR instructs authors that footnotes conform to The Bluebook, 22nd edition (the current edition; confirm on the submissions page before filing, since editions are periodically revised).
When to trigger
- Drafting or revising footnotes that carry doctrinal weight
- Unsure which of several authorities to cite, or in what order
- Cite formatting is inconsistent (signals, short forms, pincites)
- Preparing the manuscript so it can survive the student-editor cite-check
Authority hierarchy (cite the strongest available)
| Tier | Authority | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| Primary, binding | Constitution, statutes, controlling precedent (the relevant court) | Strongest — cite first |
| Primary, persuasive | Out-of-jurisdiction cases, lower courts, legislative history | Use to fill gaps; flag as persuasive |
| Secondary, authoritative | Treatises, Restatements, leading law-review articles | Support and framing, not a substitute for primary |
| Secondary, general | Student notes, blogs, news | Last resort; sparingly and transparently |
Rule of thumb: never let a secondary source stand in for available primary authority. If a proposition of law rests only on a treatise, find and cite the case or statute behind it.
Pinpoint citation (pincites are non-negotiable)
- Pin every proposition. Cite the exact page (and where relevant the paragraph or footnote) the proposition comes from — not just the first page of the case or article.
- Quote accurately and pin the quote. Every quotation needs a pincite to its source page.
- Match the signal to the relationship. No signal = directly states; See = supports; See also = additional support; Cf. = analogous; But see = contradicts; Contra = directly contradicts. Misused signals are a classic cite-check correction.
- Use short forms correctly. Id. for the immediately preceding authority; supra / hereinafter per Bluebook for later short cites. Keep them unambiguous after edits move footnotes around.
- Order authorities within a footnote by the Bluebook ordering rules (constitutions, statutes, cases by court and date, then secondary), not by the order you found them.
Bluebook specifics that trip authors
- Typeface conventions differ between law-review footnotes (large-and-small caps, italics) and practitioner documents — HLR uses the academic conventions.
- Case names: italicized in text; follow abbreviation tables for reporters and courts.
- Parentheticals that explain why a cited case matters strengthen a footnote (and editors expect them for non-obvious support).
- String cites: order and signal-group them correctly; do not pad with redundant authority.
Checklist
- Every legal proposition rests on the strongest available authority (primary over secondary)
- Every cite has a pincite; every quotation is pinned to its page
- Signals (See, Cf., But see, Contra) match the actual relationship
- Short forms (Id., supra) are correct and survive footnote reordering
- Authorities within each footnote are Bluebook-ordered (22nd edition rules)
- Explanatory parentheticals added where support is non-obvious
- Academic (law-review) typeface conventions applied
Anti-patterns
- Citing a treatise or article where binding primary authority exists
- "Page 1" cites with no pincite to the actual proposition
- Wrong signals (using See for a proposition the source states directly, or no signal where you needed See)
- Dangling Id. / supra after footnotes were rearranged in editing
- String cites padded with redundant or off-point authority
Output format
【Authority audit】each key proposition → strongest cite (primary? Y/N)
【Pincites】every cite + quote pinned? [Y/N]
【Signals】reviewed against relationship? [Y/N]
【Short forms】Id./supra consistent after reordering? [Y/N]
【Bluebook ordering】within-footnote order correct? [Y/N]
【Next】hlr-footnotes-and-cite-check (apparatus + source-pull readiness)
Supplementary resources
../../resources/external_tools.md— Bluebook, citators (Shepard's/KeyCite), reference managers../../resources/official-source-map.md— HLR's role as a Bluebook co-publisher
版本历史
- 1839142 当前 2026-07-05 13:17
