ILNews

Commemorating Constitution Day? There’s an app for that

Marilyn Odendahl
September 17, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Just in time for Constitution Day, there is now an app for constitutional case law.

The new app and improved web page gives easier access to the nearly 3,000-page publication, “The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation,” and allows for updates of new cases three or four times a year.

The U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, the Library of Congress and the Government Printing Office launched the app Sept. 17, 2013, to mark Constitution Day. Release of the app also coincides with the 100th anniversary of the printed version of the analysis and interpretation popularly known as “Constitution Annotated.”

“The premise of the Constitution Annotated for 100 years has been to reflect our current interpretation and application of America’s most fundamental law,” Librarian of Congress James Billington stated in a press release. “These new 21st century methods of distributing, accessing and updating this important document mean that the insightful and timely analysis our Library of Congress experts produce each year is easily and freely accessible to anyone.”

Using the app and new website, everyone can locate constitutional amendments, federal and state laws that were ruled unconstitutional, and tables of recent cases with corresponding topics and constitutional implications.

The new “Constitution Annotated” along with a suite of constitutional resources can be viewed at http://beta.congress.gov/constitution-annotated/. The page features links to the app stores, an interactive table listing recent cases of interest, a bibliography of Constitution-related primary documents in American history, and tips for searching the website.

Also, the app can be downloaded free from iTunes. However, Android users will have to put their mobile devices away. An app for that operating system is still under development.

 

 

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT