You can watch the original at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMqReTJkjjg. (I picked the longer version at 3 minutes that includes the leadup to why the debate happened.)
Looking at Starlink's coverage map (for stationary service at least), they seem to very much be playing by the rules (i.e. international laws and regulations regarding satellite communication services): https://www.starlink.com/map
A "break rules and become unregulateable" approach would not have service boundaries corresponding to political borders.
The initial constellation also lacked polar orbits, which limits the maximum latitude at which satellites are available.
But both are being addressed now, and then it’s really only a question of regulatory approval.
This is the problem with deregulating businesses (as opposed to deregulating people).
We saw one version of this with Uber and Airbnb, essentially blowing up taxi and rental regulations, respectively. This is happening with AI, where regulation is hopelessly lost in its current state. We have seen this (unsuccessfully so far) with finance and the blockchain. And arguably this is a legacy which traces its way through industrial revolution (which saw the breakup of monarchy's monopoly on labor and land) or even the stirrup or the sword.
Breaking existing rules and being unregulatable is probably an intentional point of Starlink.