1) Rawls argues for a limitation in the right of civil disobedience since that could potentially cause severe institutional disorder if a large number of people has good reasons to disobey. However, this limitation does not seem reasonable, as in the case of racism many people are affected by an unjust law. How would be movements like Black Lives Matter justified? (see Rawls 1999, 328)
2) Rawls defines that civil disobedience is justified only if the two principles (equal liberty, and fair equality of opportunity) are violated (see Rawls 1999, 326). Would this definition include cases of unequal distribution of goods?