If you look at literally what is happening, it is witnesses declining to process certain transactions. That's a little different from 'freezing', even if the practical effect is similar. I'm not sure how courts might take up the issue of compelling witnesses to process a transaction they don't support, but morally I'm pretty sure I am okay with it, so long as the witnesses can still be voted out and replaced, which they can.

IMO, if someone doesn't like the way the witnesses chosen by stakeholders do their job, then the best recourse is to vote in new ones, and if you don't like DPoS where stakeholders choose witnesses, choose another blockchain.