I’d argue he always held true to his beliefs, even when the government shifted around him. That’s more lawful than a character who allows their actions to be swayed by external pressure. He’s meant to be the ideal that America strives towards, which would include standing up to the government when it does fucked up shit. He held onto his beliefs and moral compass, even when the government had labeled him a rebel for doing so.
His beliefs didn’t change exactly, but his understanding of the world did.
That’s not what D&D Lawful means, though. You literally just described Chaotic Good.
[Insert “Lawful doesn’t mean they follow the law. It means they follow a set of rules and refer to those rules for guidance when uncertain about how to proceed. Chaotic means they make it up as they go” argument here.]
You can have a lawful evil assassin who breaks the law by murdering people. As long as they have a strict code of conduct (like maybe they never kill kids, always kill to make a statement, never kill for free, etc,) then they are lawful. Because the law of the land may change, but the character’s code won’t. That code is what makes them lawful; Not following the law of the land.
The Assassin alien from Mass Effect 2 (and 3) is a good example of a lawful assassin
