Joe. The statement raises many issues and can be discussed on many levels.
1)The Catalan Referendum was banned by the Spanish government. It is also a human right to seek freedom. (From the preamble of the American Constitution: Second, to "secure the blessings of liberty", which were to be enjoyed by not only the first generation, but for all who came after, "our posterity)
It can be legitimately asked what is the superior law in this instance?
I use the preamble merely as an example because open societies aspire to the same ideal.

2)Another example is travellers. The vast majority now live in houses/flats/apartments and a small minority still travel. This small sector is a living anachronism like bodgers and coopers. If the vast majority of the population have to abide by a codified set of laws in order for society to function, why should a small group have the arrogance to suppose they can ignore whatever part of the legal code suits and create misery for thousands, besides costing the ratepayer vast sums? I do not have to give examples, the newspapers are full of them. They continue to try to live the life that has gone the way of the dodo. There is no place for it in the modern world-the same as armies no longer use bows and arrows.

3)Another example is International Corporations employing weasels as accountants and lawyer, and armies of lobbyists and distributors of largesse, in order to bend the law to their own ends.

4)Multi millionaires can also fund means of exempting themselves from the financial controls that ordinary people are constrained with.

There are no easy answers and it seems no one size fits all.