4 ms·
I don't see the direct challenge in the supermarket example. It challenged the law in the same way as the left shoe example: comply with the explicit provision
by Gormo 16y ago
I don't see the direct challenge in the supermarket example. It challenged the law in the same way as the left shoe example: comply with the explicit provisions of a bad law in such a way as to render its object unattainable.
Rosa Parks deliberately violated the law - this was a direct challenge, and one justified because the law was not just bad, but intentionally malicious.
- davidw 16y agoBecause everyone can see exactly what the supermarket is doing, whereas the shoe guy did what he did by sneaking around.
- Gormo 16y agoWhat's the difference? The shoe importer complied with the established laws as written (assuming that there was no prohibition on the original intended recipient of the merchandise bidding on the auction once the customs period has expired).
- davidw 16y agoIs it that hard to see? The shoe importer is just doing something sneaky for his (and his customers - let's not forget the import duties are a net loss) gain, but he's not really doing anything at all to publicly challenge the law. Whereas the supermarket guys are quite blatant in what they're doing to the point where the local government either had to relent or crack down.