Contributor Standards

Licensed attorneys may apply to contribute jurisdiction-specific entries subject to editorial review and credential verification. The following standards govern eligibility, submission requirements, and editorial compliance.

Eligibility

EchoLegal accepts contributions exclusively from licensed attorneys.

This requirement exists because EchoLegal is a legal reference. Accuracy depends on contributors who have the professional training, jurisdictional knowledge, and ethical obligations that accompany bar admission.

Minimum Requirements

  • 1.

    Active bar admission in at least one jurisdiction. The bar admission must be current and in good standing. Retired or inactive admissions are noted but do not qualify for authoring or reviewing legal content.

  • 2.

    Willingness to undergo bar verification. EchoLegal verifies all bar admissions through public bar directories, certificate review, or peer attestation.

  • 3.

    Agreement to the EchoLegal Contributor Agreement, which governs content licensing, attribution, and editorial authority.

Verification Process

Credential verification is required before any content can be submitted for review. The process consists of:

1

Application

Submit bar admission jurisdiction, bar number, years of practice, specialization areas, and languages of fluency.

2

Bar Directory Verification

EchoLegal confirms bar admission through the relevant jurisdiction's public attorney directory. For jurisdictions without digital directories, certificate review or peer attestation by two verified contributors is accepted.

3

Activation

Upon verification, the contributor is activated as an Author and may submit content for review. Promotion to Reviewer or higher tiers requires demonstrated contribution history and nomination by existing editorial staff.

4

Annual Re-Verification

All contributors must confirm active bar status annually. Contributors who do not re-verify within 60 days of the re-verification date have publishing privileges paused until the process is completed.

Editorial Process

All content follows a structured editorial workflow before publication:

  1. i.

    Drafting

    The author drafts content following EchoLegal's editorial policy: neutral tone, primary source citations, appropriate disclaimers, and jurisdictional scope clearly identified.

  2. ii.

    Peer Review

    A Reviewer with competence in the relevant jurisdiction evaluates the submission for legal accuracy, completeness, and editorial compliance. The reviewer may approve, request revisions, or reject the submission with a documented rationale.

  3. iii.

    Publication

    Approved content is published by a Jurisdiction Editor, Senior Editor, or the Editorial Director. The editorial board retains final structural authority over classification, jurisdiction tagging, and authority-level assignment. Published content displays the publication date, author attribution, reviewer attribution, and review date.

  4. iv.

    Ongoing Maintenance

    Published content is subject to periodic review per the schedule defined in the Editorial Policy. Authors are notified when their content is due for review and are expected to update or confirm accuracy.

Contributor Attribution and Recognition

Professional Attribution

Named attribution on every published entry. Author and reviewer credentials, bar admissions, and jurisdictional competence are recorded alongside all content.

Jurisdiction-Specific Contributor Profile

Verified contributors are listed on the Editorial Board page with their credentials, jurisdictional coverage, and role within the encyclopedia system.

Citable Publication Record

Published entries carry structured citation metadata, persistent identifiers, and authority-level classification. Entries are formatted for citation in legal and academic contexts.

Publication Credit

Publication within the encyclopedia system constitutes a verifiable record of subject-matter expertise, documented with jurisdiction tagging and citation metadata.

Contributor Conduct

Contributors must:

  • Maintain active bar admission in good standing throughout their contribution period.
  • Author content only within jurisdictions where they hold competence or, for general content, clearly identify the jurisdictional scope.
  • Disclose any conflict of interest that could affect editorial objectivity.
  • Respond to review feedback and revision requests within a reasonable timeframe.
  • Not submit content that has been substantially published elsewhere without disclosure.

Citation & Authority Standards (Canon v2)

EchoLegal maintains a structured citation standard for all primary source metadata. This standard governs how statutes, regulations, treaties, and agency materials are recorded in citation fields and rendered in source disclosures.

Authority Levels

Each primary source entry is classified by its position in the legal hierarchy (e.g., federal statute, federal regulation, treaty, agency guidance). This classification enables consistent weighting across entries and supports structured retrieval.

Canonical Identifiers

Each source is assigned a deterministic, lowercase identifier (e.g., usc-26-7701-a, cfr-26-301.7701-1). These identifiers ensure consistency when the same authority is cited across multiple entries and enable cross-referencing.

Normalization Scope

Citation normalization applies to structured citation fields and primary source metadata rendered in source disclosures. Narrative body text is not subject to automated normalization and follows conventional prose style.

PR Verification

All pull requests that modify citation data must pass citation tests and strict lint checks before merge. These checks verify formatting compliance, authority level completeness, and canonical ID assignment.

The full specification is maintained in the Citation Canon reference document.

Normative Hierarchy and Authority Modeling

EchoLegal models law as a layered authority system. Each source cited in a primary source disclosure occupies a defined position within the normative hierarchy. This hierarchy governs not only how sources are classified, but also the order in which they are presented to the reader.

Constitutional and Statutory Authority

The highest tier. Constitutional provisions and enacted statutes represent binding law. Primary analysis of any legal question begins at this level. Statutes define obligations, rights, and penalties with the force of legislative authority.

Implementing Regulations

Regulations promulgated by executive agencies under statutory authorization. They carry the force of law within their delegated scope, but cannot exceed or contradict the statute they implement.

Administrative Instruments

Forms, instructions, and procedural documents issued by agencies to operationalize statutory and regulatory requirements. These instruments are interpretive in nature; they represent an agency's administrative position but do not independently create legal obligations.

Agency Guidance and Publications

Revenue rulings, revenue procedures, notices, publications, and similar materials. These provide the agency's interpretive position but lack the binding force of statute or regulation. They are cited for context, not as controlling authority.

Lower-tier instruments cannot override higher-tier authority. A form instruction cannot alter a statutory obligation; a publication cannot supersede a regulation. Where a conflict exists between tiers, the higher-tier source controls.

This hierarchy is enforced structurally. Authority classification and canonical identifiers ensure that source presentation order reflects normative weight, not editorial preference. These mechanisms are applied consistently across all entries that include primary source disclosures.

Submission Compliance Checklist

Every submission that includes primary source disclosures must satisfy the following requirements before review. Submissions that do not meet these criteria are non-compliant and will be returned without review.

1.

Every primary source carries an AuthorityLevel classification corresponding to its position in the normative hierarchy.

2.

Every primary source includes a canonical identifier conforming to the Citation Canon specification.

3.

Sources are classified into the correct tier: constitutional/statutory, implementing regulation, administrative instrument, or agency guidance/publication.

4.

Source presentation order reflects normative authority weight. No editorial override of tier precedence is permitted.

5.

All penalty disclosures are anchored to the specific statutory provision that authorizes the penalty.

6.

Canonical identifiers follow the deterministic format defined in the Citation Canon (e.g., US-26USC-6038A, US-26CFR-1.6038A-1).

Inquiries

Licensed attorneys may apply to contribute jurisdiction-specific entries subject to editorial review. Inquiries may be directed through the support page.

Contact