Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-1150_new_d18e.pdf
Page Number: 13.0

10 

GEORGIA v. PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC. 

Opinion of the Court 

and published in the official code alongside that text at the
legislature’s  direction.  OCGA  §1–1–1;  see  906  F. 3d,  at
1245, 1255; Tr. of Oral Arg. 8.

If there were any doubt about the link between the Com-
mission  and  the  legislature,  the  Georgia  Supreme  Court 
has dispelled it by holding that, under the Georgia Consti-
tution, “the work of the Commission; i.e., selecting a pub-
lisher and contracting for and supervising the codification 
of  the  laws  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly,  including
court interpretations thereof, is within the sphere of legisla-
tive authority.”  Harrison Co., 244 Ga., at 330, 260 S. E. 2d, 
at 34 (emphasis added).  That holding is not limited to the
Commission’s role in codifying the statutory text.  The Com-
mission’s  “legislative  authority”  specifically  includes  its
“codification of . . . court interpretations” of the State’s laws. 
Ibid.  Thus, as a matter of state law, the Commission wields 
the legislature’s authority when it works with Lexis to pro-
duce the annotations.  All of this shows that the Commis-
sion  serves  as  an  extension  of  the  Georgia  Legislature  in
preparing  and  publishing  the  annotations.    And  it  helps
explain  why  the  Commission  brought  this  suit  asserting 
copyright  in  the  annotations  “on  behalf  of  and  for  the 
benefit  of ”  the  Georgia  Legislature  and  the  State  of 
Georgia.  App. 20.2 

2 

The second step is to determine whether the Commission 
creates the annotations in the “discharge” of its legislative 
“duties.”  Banks, 128 U. S., at 253.  It does.  Although the
annotations are not enacted into law through bicameralism
and presentment, the Commission’s preparation of the an-

—————— 

2 JUSTICE THOMAS does not dispute that the Commission is an exten-
sion of the legislature; he instead faults us for highlighting the multiple
features of the Commission that make clear that this is so.  See post, at 
16 (dissenting opinion).