2. In the \"divide and conquer\" version of Weingast's model of the rule of law, demonstrate that the subgame perfect equilibrium among Nash players will be such that the sovereign always transgresses against at least one subgroup of the citizenry, subgroup A or subgroup B. Next, suppose that players act like Nashians in the subgames respectively following the sovereign's choices of \"transgress against none\" and \"transgress against all,\" but approach either of the subgames involving partial transgression as \"Rawlsian\" Nash players, such that they evaluate each subgame as though there were an equal chance of being the subgroup of the citizenry favored or disfavored by the sovereign. Given this Rawlsian assumption, demonstrate that there is a subgame perfect equilibrium in which the sovereign transgresses against neither subgroup