This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
According to JOSHUA S. JOHNSON, the Eleventh Circuit held that annotations to Georgia's official code are categorically ineligible for copyright protection.
Background and question before the Court
According to MR. CITRON, georgia presented the question whether the government edicts doctrine extends to documents that lack the force of law.
What each side argues
Georgia (Petitioner)
According to JOSHUA S. JOHNSON, the Eleventh Circuit held that annotations to Georgia's official code are categorically ineligible for copyright protection.
Public.Resource.Org, Inc. (Respondent)
According to MR. YANG, the annotations are intended to be comprehensive under the contract with the publisher.
According to States, the states want official versions to exist and supervise what goes into them.
What happened at oral argument
Justice Kavanaugh asked a question about the case.
According to JUSTICE KAGAN, justice Kagan questioned the role of the Commission in deciding what should be included in the annotations.
Justice Sotomayor asked whether the annotations could be copyrighted and used to preclude others from copying them.
According to Justice KAGAN, justice Kagan raised the issue of whether the annotations contain a point of view, noting that they appear neutral.
Justice Alito asked for clarification of the first part of the two‑part test: what constitutes a “legal work.”
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Many courts have cited the Georgia annotations, showing their practical influence on legal interpretation.
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- b8348cc2edb08d1614fb-r1-c1f69047d1e05e17.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 26, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.