Passage: Civil disobedience, the intentional and public violation of a law for a perceived moral purpose, has been a key theme in political philosophy. Henry David Thoreau argued that individuals have a duty to prioritize their conscience over the dictates of the state, particularly when the state's laws support injustice. John Rawls later refined this, defining civil disobedience as a non-violent, political act addressed to the sense of justice of the majority. For Rawls, civil disobedience is only justifiable in a 'nearly just' society as a last resort to protest clear and serious injustices. Critically, the practitioner of civil disobedience must be willing to accept the legal consequences of their actions. This acceptance serves two purposes: it demonstrates the actor's respect for the overall legal system and it signals the sincerity and seriousness of their moral claim. Critics of civil disobedience argue that it is a threat to the rule of law, as it allows individuals to become judges of which laws they will follow, potentially leading to social instability.