Rule of law requires obedience to statutes and natural law. A statute, or for that matter an administrative order from a court, can be just as misbegotten as any malfeasance you could imagine.
I agree, and I'll add "especially by those that are charged with creating, upholding and enforcing the Rule of Law". If they cannot or will not set the example, why should they expect anyone else to follow?
A statute, or for that matter an administrative order from a court, can be just as misbegotten as any malfeasance you could imagine.
Indeed, we see that too may legislators ignore the Constitution, and kick the proverbial "is-this-Constitutional?" can down the road for someone else to rule on (while their law gets enforces anyway), and too many judges no longer seem constrained by the Rule of Law, or by their oaths, but instead can be counted on, or coerced to legislate from the bench, to impose their opinion, their will, on the rest of us, regardless of how the people speak through their hired (elected) legislators. Not that I believe that a majority should be allowed to infringe on the rights of others, but those in the majority have their own rights that must also be protected.
The process seems broken to me right now...