Earlier quoted context omitted.
A recent Australian Prime Minister did claim legislative power to alter mathematics. Poor quality sound, but: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VB3uQHa14g
Not sure why you're trying to push that. :( It was a smart arse response to a smart arse question.
Haven't come across that justification before.
If it was a smart arse question, I'd be guessing it was justified in the face of attempts at the Australian government at the time attempting to further their already advanced designs toward creating a surveillance state.
For the sake of clarification, I'm pointing it out as an example of denial-based justification of a virtually untenable position, in two contexts:
One: If the leader of a country would say something like that in public then, hey, make the request to repeal a privacy law, who knows, there may be enough greased palms for this to slide through. Not that I want to give them any ideas.
Two: the person to whom I was replying mentioned engineering challenges of bridge building and rocket science which could be made easier with some legislation that reduces the complexity of maths and physics (if Malcolm is to be believed) - for the sake of humour.