In a legal citation, “et seq.” is a Latin abbreviation meaning “and the following,” and it tells you that the statute or regulation being cited continues past the section number listed. So the et seq. meaning in law is simply this: the section named is the starting point, and the writer wants you to keep reading through the related sections that come after it. Pronounced “et seek,” the abbreviation appears constantly in federal statutes, court filings, and regulatory codes.
How to Read It in a Citation
The phrase comes from the Latin verb sequor, “to follow.” It can stand for the singular “et sequitur” or the plural “et sequentes” or “et sequentia,” but nobody distinguishes between those forms in modern legal writing. You will see “et seq.” whether the citation covers two additional sections or two hundred.
Take a citation like “42 U.S.C. § 1981 et seq.” That means: start at Section 1981 of Title 42 of the United States Code, and keep reading through the sections that follow. Section 1981 itself guarantees equal rights to make and enforce contracts, and the sections after it address related civil rights protections Congress grouped together under the same subchapter.1Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 42 USC 1981 – Equal Rights Under the Law The “et seq.” is asking you to consider the whole cluster, not just that one section.
Statutes You’ll See It Attached To
A handful of federal laws are cited with “et seq.” so routinely that the abbreviation has practically fused to their names. Recognizing them makes legal documents read a lot faster.
- Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. The federal law prohibiting employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Section 2000e contains the definitions; the sections that follow lay out the prohibitions, enforcement mechanisms, and remedies. A lawyer citing “§ 2000e et seq.” invokes the whole Title VII framework, not just the definitions.2Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 42 USC 2000e – Definitions3Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 42 USC 2000e-2 – Unlawful Employment Practices
- ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. The Employee Retirement Income Security Act governs employer-sponsored benefit plans, including pensions and health insurance. Section 1001 states Congress’s policy findings, and the many sections that follow establish fiduciary standards, reporting requirements, and enforcement rules.4Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 29 USC 1001 – Congressional Findings and Declaration of Policy
- CERCLA/Superfund, 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act addresses hazardous waste cleanup. Even other federal statutes refer to it internally as “42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.”5Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 42 USC Ch 103 – Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
- NEPA regulations, 40 C.F.R. § 1500 et seq. The National Environmental Policy Act’s implementing regulations begin at Part 1500 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, covering the purpose and policy of environmental review through the detailed procedures for environmental impact statements.6Legal Information Institute. 40 CFR Part 1500 – Purpose and Policy
These examples show why the abbreviation persists. Many federal laws span dozens or hundreds of sections, and listing each one would be impractical. “Et seq.” works as shorthand that everyone in the legal world recognizes.
The Ambiguity: Where Does It End?
The abbreviation has a real weakness. It tells you where to start reading, but it never tells you where to stop. When a filing cites “42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.,” does the writer mean the seventeen sections that make up Title VII? The entire subchapter? Everything through the end of Chapter 21? There’s no built-in answer.
Context usually resolves the question. A brief about workplace discrimination that cites “§ 2000e et seq.” obviously means the Title VII provisions, not every section of the U.S. Code numbered higher than 2000e. But in less familiar statutory territory, the vagueness becomes a real problem. A judge reading a motion may not know exactly which provisions the attorney considers relevant, and the attorney may be using “et seq.” precisely because they haven’t pinpointed the specific sections that support their argument. This is the core criticism of the abbreviation: it can function as a substitute for careful legal research.
Some courts have local rules requiring citations to include specific page numbers, paragraph numbers, or line references rather than sweeping shorthand. Where those rules apply, “et seq.” doesn’t satisfy the court’s expectations for particularity. The safer practice in contested litigation is to identify the exact sections you rely on.
What the Bluebook and ALWD Say
Contrary to what many lawyers assume, The Bluebook does not encourage “et seq.” It flatly prohibits it. Rule 3.3(b) instructs writers citing multiple sections to use two section symbols (§§) followed by an inclusive range. The rule’s language is blunt: “do not use ‘et seq.'” The preferred format looks like “§§ 2000e–2000e-17” rather than “§ 2000e et seq.”
The ALWD Citation Manual, the other major citation guide used in law schools and practice, is more permissive. It recognizes “et seq.” as a standard way to indicate that a statutory reference encompasses more than a single section. That split between the two leading systems partly explains why the abbreviation remains common despite the Bluebook’s prohibition. Many practitioners learned ALWD rules or simply follow the conventions they see in published court opinions, where “et seq.” appears routinely.
As a practical matter, few judges will reject a filing for using “et seq.” instead of an inclusive range. But in formal legal scholarship, Bluebook compliance matters, and editors will flag the abbreviation.
When to Use It and When to Skip It
The abbreviation earns its place in a few specific situations: jurisdictional statements in complaints, broad references to an entire statutory scheme in the introductory sections of briefs, and informal shorthand in memos or emails between attorneys who already know the law. In each of those contexts, the reader either doesn’t need pinpoint precision or already has the background to fill in the gaps.
A complaint alleging employment discrimination, for example, will typically cite “Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.” in its jurisdictional statement to establish that the case arises under a recognized federal law.2Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 42 USC 2000e – Definitions That tells the court the legal framework without bogging down the opening paragraphs in section-by-section detail.
Skip “et seq.” when your argument depends on specific provisions, when you’re writing for a court with local rules demanding citation particularity, or when you’re preparing a law review article subject to Bluebook standards. If your argument hinges on a specific subsection, cite it directly. Using “et seq.” when you mean one particular provision looks lazy at best and evasive at worst. Judges and opposing counsel both notice the difference. The few extra characters are worth the clarity.
Related Latin Shorthand You’ll See Nearby
“Et seq.” is not the only Latin abbreviation floating through legal documents. A related term worth knowing is “passim,” meaning “scattered throughout.” While “et seq.” points to consecutive sections starting from one location, “passim” indicates that support for a proposition appears in multiple non-consecutive places across a source. In modern legal writing, “passim” has largely been replaced by the signal “see generally,” but you’ll still see it in older briefs and some tables of authorities.
“Id.,” short for “idem” (meaning “the same”), is used when citing the same source as the immediately preceding citation. And “supra,” meaning “above,” refers back to a source already cited in full earlier in the document. Each of these compresses information that would otherwise take up unnecessary space, and each points the reader in a different direction.