Keep two models in play against named files, not against an ideal rights theory. Holmes and Sunstein in The Cost of Rights (1999) treat every right as a claim on taxes and courts: the failure is underfunding the stack you already have. The essay treats an unbounded individual claim as a named good with no production path, even when courts and budgets exist. They split on Brazil's Constitution Article 196 — health as a right of all and a duty of the State — where courts ordered medicines off the SUS lists until STF Theme 6 (RE 566.471, September 2024) tried to put the claim back on the list. They also split on IDEA: FAPE is individually enforceable while CRS R44624 puts FY2025 Part B at 10.2 percent of national average per-pupil spending against an authorized 40 percent. France's DALO housing queue is already scored next door; pointer only. Discriminator: if funding IDEA to 40 percent of APPE, or Theme 6's list rule, closes the queue, Holmes wins; if the individual claim still outruns the plant, the essay's delivery questions are the live object. Author dispositions stay author-owned.