Liberty-immunity boundaries

Updated 3 October 2026: concept, except_when, claim, definition … sufficient, and default strength have been removed, together with their special deprecation diagnostic. References below to the former behavior and corpus sources are historical. New source uses relation, unless, duty, a strict rule, and defeasible.

What the construct does NOT do in 0.2: scope, reserved values, neighbouring constructs, and the selection rule.

OverviewBoundariesCorpus formsPitfalls

Does not

• Not derive permission from silence. A weak query without an explicitly chosen universe, snapshot, interpretation, and closure policy is UNDETERMINED. There is no “default” permission in 0.2.
• Not perform liberty. liberty has no goal: only a window (CREATED / ACTIVE / EXPIRED). The SATISFIED/VIOLATED categories do not apply to it.
• Not prohibit an action by immunity. The transformation is locked, not the physics: an invalid exercise remains factually possible, with separate consequences.
• Not materialize an effect under dispute. An undefeated power/immunity pair is conservative effect materialization: the effect gets no support. Without priority the pair gives UNRESOLVED_NORMATIVE_CONFLICT, not victory.
• Not duplicate positions with views. claim_right, liability, disability are views of one canonical position; no second instance is created.

Reserved and closed

• A claim-correlative position is written as duty with bearer and beneficiary; the claim_right view remains available as a query.
• Bare entitlement without explicit lowering is a static error: the author must choose a claim against an addressee, a power to demand, a constitutive eligibility fact, or a combination.
• Discretion is not a modality: power with options + liberty of choice + constraints/goals + evaluative predicates.

Neighbours and the selection rule

• liberty vs the weak query: a norm-position with conflict vs computing “no prohibition”. Must beat a prohibition — liberty.
• liberty vs prohibition: conflict only over the same action for one subject with overlapping windows; priority decides.
• immunity vs a prohibition on the organ: un-lockability of the effect vs the addressee’s forbearance. No effect produced — immunity.
• immunity vs power: shield and sword considered as a pair; the effect comes with exercise + valid_when + window + no immunity.
• holder/against vs bearer/beneficiary: the entitled/opponent vs the obliged/beneficiary.