In other words, your post presumes that the law is ethical, moral and just. It isn’t.
“In other words, your post presumes that the law is ethical, moral and just. It isn’t.”
I’m not making that argument at all. The law exists. Once the law exists, those who break it are lawbreakers and those who fail to enforce it are lawbreakers of a special type, this being the new trend under 0bama. But there are no consequences for those who fail or refuse to enforce the law. There is a probably smaller but not insignificant segment of people who obey “legislatively-passed” law but run afoul of administrative “law”. (It shouldn’t be called “law”, as pointed out by Prof. Philip Hamburger in last months Imprimis; it was not passed by the Consitutionally empowered method of lawmaking, it was a 4th-branch exercise and should thus be called “regulation” or some other term that is different then “law”) This is our modern paradigm, and I don’t get any comfort from it.
But those who follow the law, as written, are none of the above.