Similarly (and it's already happened several times), what happens when someone finds a loophole and drains the entire GDP of a country into their account? Do we say "Oh, well that's what the smart contract said, so bye bye country?"
In the future, I don't think we'll see many monolithic contracts like you're describing (no USA smart contract). Instead I think we'll have a bunch of small, simple, and battle tested smart contracts that we can fit together like lego bricks.
Its essentially people thinking "we're not getting a fair shake here from human law, let's try robot law".
I don't think smart contracts are in that space and I don't think any level of maturity is going to get you there.
Imagine a future with multiple levels of smart contracts that allow for court intervention and arbitration. It starts to resemble the checks and balances we have in place now, but the rules are public and codified.
If, however, there are a limited number of known possible outcomes, then smart contracts offer advantages over court-based settlements.
You mean like, say, the current system of laws we have? (:
Sure, laws are strange and arcane and require expertise to translate them into understandable terms, but any form of code has the exact same problem.
Currently, the current system requires lengthy court intervention with interpretation done after the fact.
Smart contracts can allow for a fixed number of resolutions with a timeframe defined up front. Smart contracts won't work for everything, but they might be a better fit for some things.