If they are not talking about either a command or permission, they are not talking about a law.
Hans Christian Andersen, wrote a story called, “The Emperor’s New Clothes”. It told a tale of a king and a kingdom who convinced themselves that a fake set of clothes were real. The illusion was shattered only when a guileless boy, upon seeing the king “dressed” in the fake set of clothes, exclaimed, “But he hasn't got anything on". Andersen’s story is an allegory for lawyers. Too many of the laws that govern us are naked of meaning. Yet, we have convinced ourselves otherwise. Hence, we shall play the part of the guileless boy. We shall exclaim "But it hasn't got anything on" when we encounter a so-called law that is naked of meaning. Legalese is a euphemism for legal bullshit. We are knee deep in it. We will use 'A Unified Theory of a Law' to detect it and expose it and rewrite it. Unlike ice cream, a law has only two flavors: a command or a permission. Therefore, if a legal speaker is pontificating about a law but is not talking about a command or a permission, we shall politely say that the pretend legal speech is a knockoff of the Emperor's New Clothes.
For examples, click here.