Social policies are usually not as rigorously-defined as things like programming rules. Thus, it is important to consider the motives of people who may end up

Social policies are usually not as rigorously-defined as things like programming rules. Thus, it is important to consider the motives of people who may end up enforcing them, because there's potentially a large difference between the law-as-intended and the law-as-enforced. If the difference is large enough, it's worthwhile to examine how the personality of the enforcer may bias the outcome. I think your argument might be valid in extremely rigorous fields like quantum mechanics - who cares who submitted the proof? But when we're talking about enforcing free speech, the person who is enforcing it has a big effect on the outcome.