You could have both (we're talking theoretically, I'm not holding my breath...): an automatic public API that answers queries, but final judgements would have t

You could have both (we're talking theoretically, I'm not holding my breath...): an automatic public API that answers queries, but final judgements would have to be approved by a human, sort of an automatic no-action letter. It would make public administration much more transparent while retaining a safety valve for corner cases. Slightly OT, but while I understand the notion that it's desirable to have at least some form of "do what I mean, not what I say" baked into the system, in practice exploits happen where the law is being used for political bullshit as opposed to legitimate regulation. I don't regard laws that are unclear, unenforceable or overly reliant on judicial interpretation to be serving the public good.