Red, White, and Bluebook -- guest post by Dwight H. Sullivan

Five years after the 21st edition’s debut, the Bluebook’s publishers have issued a 22d edition. They inform us that this edition makes “hundreds of edits, large and small.” Preface, THE BLUEBOOK: A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF CITATION (22d ed. 2025). You can order your own hard copy here. Mine arrived within 52 hours of placing the order. When you order the book, you will also receive an access key that will allow you to use the Bluebook Online for 30 days.

The issuance of a new Bluebook edition is particularly important for military appellate litigators, given various military appellate courts’ requirement that counsel cite authorities in accordance with the Bluebook’s often-arcane edicts. For example, CAAF Rule 37(c)(2) provides, “Citations must conform with The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation.” There is more than a little irony in that requirement as CAAF does not cite its own decisions in the manner prescribed by the Bluebook. Like Table 1.1 of the 21st edition, that table in the 22d edition provides for CoMA citations, “Cite to C.M.A., if therein.” Yet CAAF’s style is to provide parallel citations to both C.M.A. and C.M.R. when one of its decisions was reported in both. E.g., United States v. Jacinto, __ M.J. __, No. 24-0144, slip op. at 3 n.2 (C.A.A.F. May 19, 2025) (citing “United States v. DuBay, 17 C.M.A. 147, 37 C.M.R. 411 (1967)”). Just as did the 21st edition, the 22d edition of the Bluebook misidentifies Lawyers Co-operative Publishing Company’s Court-Martial Reports as “Court Martial Reports.” (While that observation may seem pedantic, how much more pedantic can you get than the Bluebook?)

Similar to CAAF’s rules, the U.S. Court of Military Commission Review Rules of Practice provide, “Citations must conform to the style prescribed by the current edition of The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation published and distributed by the Harvard Law Review Association, unless otherwise directed by the CMCR. The CMCR, in its discretion, may adopt and publish its own rules of citation.” C.M.C.R. R. 15(e)(1) (lack of italicization in original). That requirement is somewhat amusing as the Bluebook continues to ignore the United States Court of Military Commission Review’s existence. You will not find a citation style for that court’s opinions, which are printed in West’s Federal Supplement.

The three DoD CCAs (but not the Coast Guard CCA) similarly generally prescribe adherence to the Bluebook, although the Air Force and Army Courts’ rules also refer to other military citation guides that often conflict with the Bluebook. See A.F. Ct. Crim. App. R. 17.1(a); A. Ct. Crim. App. R. 17.1(c); N-M. Ct. Crim. App. R. 17.2.

Changes in the Bluebook’s 22d edition include the creation of a new signal: “contrast” for use in “situations in which the contrast between authorities rather than a comparison between them will offer support for the proposition.” Another innovation is an official version of the popular “cleaned up” parenthetical: “‘citation modified’ to be used when a quotation has been stripped of internal quotation marks, brackets, ellipses, internal citations, and footnote reference numbers and capitalization has been modified without brackets.” See B.5.3. Rule 18 has been expanded to, inter alia, provide guidance for citing AI-generated content. Table T10 concerning geographical terms has been expanded. Please provide comments noting any additional important changes you identify. [Real names only, please. -- Ed.]

___

Dwight Sullivan is a senior counsel at the Air Force Appellate Defense Division and a professorial lecturer in law at the George Washington University Law School. The views expressed in this guest rant are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Defense or any of its components.