of the two- while the judiciary is assigned the duty of interpretation and application of the law, and at times making applicable law, the legislature on the other hand is assigned the role of making laws, instead of construing the statutes after they are enacted. Justice Ginsburg held that the annotations in the OCGA are not done in a legislative capacity because: First, the annotations are not created contemporaneously with the statutes and merely a commentary on the statutes that have already been enacted. This sets the OCGA annotations apart from uncopyrightable legislative materials like committee reports, generated before a law’s enactment, and tied tightly to the task of law-formulation. Second, annotations are descriptive rather than prescriptive and contain the views of the author on the given statute. Third, annotations are given for the purpose of convenient reference by the public and aim to inform the citizenry at large. Merely because they are considered to be merged with the statutory provisions does not render the annotations to be more than explanatory, referential, or commentarial material. See also Edict of government Veeck v. Southern Building Code Congress Int'l References Further reading . . . . External links Public.Resource.Org 2020 in United States case law United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court Legal history of Georgia (U.S. state) Promulgation United States copyright case law