The idea of an Ethereum "Protocol Court" to resolve ecosystem disputes has merit but faces challenges. On-chain governance and smart contracts can automate many conflict resolutions, reducing the need for a centralized court. However, complex disputes—like protocol upgrades or contentious forks—might benefit from a formal arbitration body to ensure fairness and transparency. A court could legitimize decisions, prevent community splits, and align with Ethereum’s decentralized ethos if designed with clear, community-driven rules. Yet, risks include centralization, bureaucracy, and potential capture by influential actors. Existing mechanisms like EIPs and community consensus have worked, though not perfectly. A court might complement, not replace, these. The future depends on Ethereum’s scale and dispute complexity—larger ecosystems may demand structured solutions. For now, enhancing on-chain tools and governance seems more practical than a dedicated court.