Civil disobedience is frequently regarded as a valid method of protesting unjust laws, rooted in the ethical duty to address and correct systemic wrongs. Historically, the movements started for social change led by Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., civil disobedience has served as a powerful catalyst. These leaders employed nonviolent resistance to expose the moral shortcomings of unjust laws and mobilize public sentiment and political action. The validity of civil disobedience lies in its commitment to nonviolence and its aim to achieve greater justice. When laws uphold inequality or violate fundamental human rights, civil disobedience becomes a crucial means for citizens to voice opposition and demand change. It is based on the belief that legal systems should uphold ethical principles and that people have a duty to resist laws that conflict with moral and democratic values. However, the justification for civil disobedience also depends on its context and manner of execution. It must be thoughtfully conducted to prevent violence and unnecessary harm, focusing on specific injustices and seeking positive outcomes. In democratic societies with existing legal avenues for change, civil disobedience should supplement rather than replace these methods, underscoring the need for legal and policy reforms while respecting the rule of law.