Each agreement can define a
context, which indicates which rules it falls under and also which court resolves the dispute. The
context (and correct me if I’m wrong) can be any contract that implements a particular court interface and is able to produce outputs that indicate its rulings.
But behind the scenes, this contact could easily use an oracle or any other method to interface with another court contract on another chain, therefore providing scalability and possibly different levels of immutability or state transition algorithms for different courts.
Of course then the issue is reputation and how to trace back reputation to the jurors, since reputation would be likely kept in the chain where the Supreme Court lives. Thoughts?