> But what you are saying here counters what OP is replying to. "Fuzziness" has no place in a system of law. There should be a way to trace back, as you said wi

> But what you are saying here counters what OP is replying to. "Fuzziness" has no place in a system of law. There should be a way to trace back, as you said with case law, to find an unambiguous decision. If not, the law needs to be clarified, not left fuzzy. I don't think you have a very good understanding of the US legal system. Caselaw consists of interpretations of laws made after (sometimes long after) those laws came into force. It's a reflection of the inherent ambiguity and fuzziness in any body of law. Law isn't like computer code. While there may be some philosophical appeal to the idea of a law code that's unambiguous and requires no judgement to interpret or apply, such a goal is actually impractical and undesirable.