What is the primary distinction between primary and secondary authority?

The primary distinction between primary and secondary authority lies in their nature and purpose within legal research. Primary authority refers to statutes, regulations, and case law that establish binding legal principles and rules. These are the official sources of law that a court will follow and that attorneys must rely on in legal arguments and decision-making.

On the other hand, secondary authority encompasses resources that provide commentary, analysis, or interpretation of primary authority, including legal encyclopedias, law review articles, treatises, and other scholarly work. While these secondary sources can help clarify and interpret the law, they do not have binding legal effect.

The other options do not accurately capture the essence of the distinction. For instance, the notion of primary authority being opinion-based versus secondary authority being fact-based misrepresents their roles; both types of authority can contain factual analysis. Similarly, limiting primary sources to local jurisdictions disregards that primary authority can include federal statutes and case law as well. Finally, the assertion that there is no distinction dismisses a fundamental aspect of legal research, where understanding the hierarchy and application between these authorities is crucial for effective advocacy and legal interpretation.