Right now lots of people do this manually.
Maybe computers can do it better.
If computers can do it better, maybe people could focus on writing new laws and refactoring old ones instead of repeatedly interpreting old laws for each case.
If we could invent a computer interpreter that acts as a judge, laws and contracts being its code might make it obvious to lawyers why it doesn't make sense to allow code to be patented.
Every time lawyers would write laws or contracts they would have to avoid using legal ideas that have already been patented subjecting them to the same legal difficulties software developers face every time they write code.
I guess I should patent that invention.
Your comment above would potentially count as disclosure. I and probably others have previously used the black-box analogy too.