But as a counterpoint, that room for interpretation, while allowing room for "bad" readings of law is also what allows some space for the same law to be adapted

But as a counterpoint, that room for interpretation, while allowing room for "bad" readings of law is also what allows some space for the same law to be adapted to changing circumstance rather than thrown out entirely. In only a few generations the world (and US society specifically in this case) has changed quite a bit from when this stuff was set down. If it was very specific but tied to the prevailing attitudes and situations of the 1700s or 1800s, it would be like a "lite version" of the folks arguing that we should be following biblical law or sharia law as written hundreds or thousands of years ago. There needs to be at least some room for interpretation and adaptation in order to avoid a system of law that does not reflect the actual people subject to it.