Except that that was the whole point of smart contracts to begin with.
The purpose was to only rely on the code, and to never have to worry about subjective things like judges and the interpretation of the law.
If the code of a smart contract isn't "the law of the land" and you have to rely on messy things like the courts, then smart contracts are useless and you may as well just create a regular contract.
The code of a smart contract will never be "the law of the land", because thousands of years worth of precedent in the legal systems of every country in the world give leeway to override the terms of contracts to satisfy other legal considerations.
Well, it could be if it is irreversible, which is what the debate is about.
Bitcoin has done a pretty good job of being irreversible, despite all the illegal stuff that happens on it, and how much I'm sure all the governments would LOVE to shut it down.
The purpose was to only rely on the code, and to never have to worry about subjective things like judges and the interpretation of the law.
If the code of a smart contract isn't "the law of the land" and you have to rely on messy things like the courts, then smart contracts are useless and you may as well just create a regular contract.