It comes down to properly identifying what is really unjust from what merely makes precisely what you’d like to do a little harder, and a question of why it makes what you want to do harder.
An unjust law is one that truly creates an undue burden people, especially large numbers of people, and especially when based on criteria that is irrelevant to how productive one can be in society. It is absolutely unjust to criminalize someone’s ancestry, since not only is it not in their control, but it also has no bearing on productivity, or destructiveness, to society.
As far as Sovereign Citizens and how they define an unjust law, they do it based on the fact that those laws don’t allow them to drive on road they don’t pay for, and don’t allow them to produce and sell drugs, basically. Every time an SC ends up on the news, it’s always complaining that they weren’t allowed to infringe on someone else’s rights or didn’t want to pay for services they demand they benefit from. Also oddly complaining that they’re not being treated like an LLC, requiring only that they pay a fine to rectify things with the law, without having to pay other penalties, such as prison time for assault.
So no, they don’t resist unjust laws at all, except occasionally by accident, based on stopped clock syndrome. Rather they resist the concept entirely that they are not kings and gods allowed to do as they please. Even when they insist penalties should merely be fines, they only consent to the fines because now it’s been proven they actually can be taken to jail by cops who are not afraid to use force when it is necessary.