Forgive my incomplete thoughts.

Reading an actual bill going through congress (H.R. 4010 The DISCLOSE act) I discovered that a bill is like programming source code in two ways.

One, much of a bill is procedure, written to be as precise as the English language makes possible, ideally so that there is no ambiguity in how it is to be interpreted and executed.

Two, new bills involve a lot of patching existing legislation. I saw this pattern a lot: go to this current law, find this particular paragraph in this particular section, and replace it with this new piece attached below.

The insight: Bills are difficult to read because, like source code, they are about procedures! Bills are procedures designed for execution by a governmental or legal system (read: processor). Simply looking at the procedures will give you only the vaguest sense of its consequence if you don’t understand how the processor works.

Source code is a fairly low level of abstraction. To help beginners understand programming, we raise the level of abstraction by writing pseudo-code, which helps us understand the consequence of these abstract procedures better.

What might be the functional equivalent of pseudo-code for law, and who might be qualified to write them?