Recently there have been a lot of questions about legalese. Here are a couple of examples:
These have been closed as off topic, with such comments as:
Analysis of the grammar used in legal documents is not a matter for language specialists, but rather of judges, and those who know how judges think, namely lawyers. Legal English does not follow normal English rules for definiteness, repetition, conjunction, reference and coreference, indirect discourse, adverbial placement, and many other syntactic phenomena. It also deploys archaic syntax, lexical items, and idioms that have not been spontaneously spoken by a native speaker in centuries. As I said, it's not within our writ here.
But, on the other hand, we also have a legal with 111 questions and the summary
Questions about the strange language of legalese.
And such comments as:
Where did this idea come from that questions about English-language legal phraseology are "off-topic" here? If the language is archaic, that only makes the case stronger for keeping it here, because that means it's a question about etymology and the evolution of the language, and nothing could be more on-topic than that.
In the on topic section of our help we do not list legalese as something we may not ask about.
So it seems to me there is a stand-off.
Do we allow legalese questions? What should our help section say about it?