Courts reason in terms of legal rights and duties, not costs and benefits.

Evidence

In addition, because courts must decide issues on the basis of law, the information they receive in legal briefs and oral argument tends to focus on legal considerations rather than on the desirability of a policy or the likely consequences of alternative approaches. Even if such information is conveyed, judges can hardly refuse to recognize a constitutional right because of doubts about its desirability. Whereas other policymakers may view policy issues in terms of alternatives and costs and benefits, courts view them in terms of legal rights and duties. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2855

Categorization

• DEFINE: Key distinction between rights-based and cost-benefit-based policymaking.
• DEEPTHINKING: The rights-versus-utility frame underlies much constitutional theory; worth sitting with as a foundational tension.
• XREF: connects to: Courts suppress entrenchment indirectly by enforcing individual rights, not systemic values — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 108