Political news you don't want to know

The Programming Language of the United States Government

A programming language leaves little room for creative interpretation. In a particular environment, a program either compiles and runs correctly or it doesn't. Our ability to create complex programs that work as intended owe everything to the precise definition and implementation of a programming language and compiler.

Without the iron set of rules that guarantee the reliable behavior of each keyword and operator it would be impossible to build these incredibly complicated objects.

Imagine for a moment that a language committee annually reviewed the details of your favorite language and refined and redefined various aspects of the language to suit their fancy. Imagine further that their recommendations were mandatory for compiler writers and that the changes were immediately made and new compilers shipped without so much as a revision number change.

The result would be computing chaos.

Every programming language is flawed. However, consistency is so overwhelmingly important that when we 'correct' the original behavior of an established language we effectively identify it as a new language. Programs written for the old standard are considered unreliable when compiled with the new edition -- if they will even compile at all. They must be modified if necessary and retested before they can be accepted as compatible with the new language version.

Every programmer knows this, of course.

The original parts of the United States Constitution were written in the American English language as spoken and written in the late 1700's. Unlike programming languages, natural languages do evolve subtley from decade to decade -- and change substantially over periods of centuries -- without so much as a new version number.

The working definition of the word 'jury', for example, has changed in the last two hundred years. Noah Webster's 1828 dictionary defines jury as:

JU'RY, n. [L. juro, to swear.] A number of freeholders, selected in the manner prescribed by law, empaneled and sworn to inquire into and try any matter of fact, and to declare the truth on the evidence given them in the case. Grand juries consist usually of twenty four freeholders at least, and are summoned to try matters alleged in indictments. Petty juries, consisting usually of twelve men, attend courts to try matters of fact in civil causes, and to decide both the law and the fact in criminal prosecutions. The decision of a petty jury is called a verdict.

[Emphasis added]

The relevant portion of a modern legal definition [from www.nolo.com]:

jury: A group of people selected to apply the law, as stated by the judge, to the facts of a case and render a decision, called the verdict.

When I sat on a jury trying a criminal case, we were explicitly told that our authority was limited to the facts of the case. That is, we were not allowed to judge the law or the applicability of the law. Note that this is inconsistent with Webster's 1828 definition of the word 'jury' but perfectly compatible with the modern legal definition from nolo.com.

Clearly, something has changed in the past two hundred years and we are no longer following the Constitution as it was written on this point.

My intent here is not to pursue this particular deviation from the language usage of that era but merely to cite a concrete example.

The courts do not have the authority to add clauses to the Constitution -- nor are they allowed to remove parts from it. However, if we ignore the language 'specification' that the Constitution was written to, we lose any expectation that we are working with consistent and reliable 'code'.

The language definition used in drafting the United States Constitution, late 1700's American English, is as important to the meaning of the Constitution as the selection of the words themselves.

To a programmer, this should be quite obvious. Most people are not programmers, however, and may spend little time considering such subtleties.

mail this link | -Ray, April 17, 2007