The subject of this month's Bar Bulletin - amendments - presents a real challenge when it comes to looking at Web site information. Much of the information on the Internet that deals with constitutional issues can be interesting, but flawed.
When looking at Web sites, I always consider the following points critical:
- What authority does the Web site have?
- The author is indicated and qualified.
- Is the content accurate?
- Sources for factual information are listed.
- There are no grammatical or spelling errors.
- Is the Web site objective, that is, free of bias?
- How current is the Web site?
- The site includes a last-updated page and is updated regularly.
- Different editions are clearly marked.
- What kind of coverage does the site contain?
- The material is relevant.
- The level of detail is appropriate.
- The major subject elements are covered.
- How is the material presented?
- It is easy to navigate and logically organized.
- It is easy to read, contains accessible text and is professional in appearance.
This month, I will start with one of my favorite Web sites, the Cornell Legal Information Institute of the Cornell Law School: http://www.law.cornell.edu/. This site contains the U.S. Constitution and its amendments, including the primary text, plus an annotated version that contains a wealth of information.
This site should be on everyone's favorite list. It is authoritative, contains in-depth treatment of the subject and is updated regularly, written by experts on the issues, easy to browse and read, objective and relevant.
The Law Library of Congress's Constitution page at http://www.loc.gov/law/guide/usconst.html includes a link to the CRS Annotations, plus links to other Web sites such as the Cornell site. It even includes links to the early debates on the Constitution contained in the Annals of Congress.
I would automatically reject Wikipedia as unauthoritative. Most of the entries do not indicate the author, as this free encyclopedia is edited by many authors. Similarly, the Findlaw Web site material on the amendments contains no real indication of where the annotations came from - although as the site is part of the Thomson West publishing giant, it is likely that the material was vetted. But I see no indication of the author of this particular material.
The Lady Liberty Constitution Clearinghouse Web site at http://www.ladylibrty.com represents the fringe aspect of constitutional sites quite well. Its organization is not immediately apparent and the home page is cluttered. The point of view is biased if you just read a page or two. The author is supposedly a graphic designer, writer and editor.
The U.S.Constitution.net site also is produced by an individual, who lists himself as a journalist with a degree in political science. It contains news links, the text of the constitution and its amendments, a discussion board and answers to frequently asked questions. However, this unauthoritative site has no real value for the researcher.
If you need further information on where to start your research on the Constitution and its amendments, feel free to call the King County Law Library at 206-296-0940. We will try to find the Web site you need, whether it is from the center or on the fringe.
