Whatever the solution, the application of economic rights remains important both to ensure an adequate and equal operationalization of the civil and political rights of the individual and to ensure an adequate standard of living. By respecting, respecting and adhering to the goals of economic justice, government measures to protect human dignity move from ambitious to productive. The application of economic rights through the courts forces us to ask ourselves whether rights are linked to democratic needs or values. Opting for the latter could mean defending the legal need to ignore social realities or to remain deliberately abstract so that the individual can decide whether democracy should function itself or maintain a more robust structure to ensure that rights – as operationalized – meet the requirements. Simply put, the court can enforce legal rights against individuals and also against the government. A legal claim is a legally recognized and protected interest. Any devaluation of a legal claim is also punishable. Legal rights affect every citizen. Legal rights are also available to all citizens, without discrimination on the basis of caste, creed and sex. Competition for apartments is not eliminated by the brakes on renting.
What is changing is the “shaping” of the competition. The restriction of private property rights reduces competition on the basis of the monetary exchange of goods and services and increases competition on the basis of personal characteristics. More generally, the weakening of private property rights increases the role of personal characteristics by encouraging sellers to discriminate against competing buyers and buyers to discriminate between sellers. In addition to determining the use of a resource, private property rights have two other attributes. One is the exclusive right to the services of the resource. For example, the owner of an apartment with full ownership rights in the dwelling has the right to determine whether and, if so, to which tenant he is renting; to live there themselves; or use it in any other peaceful manner. It is the right to determine the use. If the owner rents the apartment, he is also entitled to all rental income from the property. This is the right to resource services (rent). The powers also illustrate a general problem in the analysis of legal rights and probably also rights in general. Namely, whether an element is to be considered as part of the very essence of the concept of right or whether it is only one element of what its content is (conditionally), that is to say, what a right exists to do or have. The property usually belongs to individuals or a small group of people.
Property rights can be extended through the use of patents and copyrights for protection purposes: the United States has long been concerned with social justice through the enforcement of economic rights. In the midst of the Great Depression, President Franklin D. Roosevelt rewrote the New Deal, with which the administration implemented a variety of policies and programs to boost employment, boost housing, and fight poverty and hunger. Decades later, the Affordable Care Act was passed to improve extreme inequalities in the health care system. The importance of economic rights and justice also has fundamental roots in U.S. legislative policy, state constitutions, and court decisions. Dworkin (1973, 1975, 1981, 1986) was a proponent of the first point of view in a formulation of his theory of rights. As a result, rights take precedence over any other consideration that is not itself based on the law. It is clear that, for many legal systems, constitutional rights, or some of them, should take precedence over any other consideration that does not flow from a constitutional right. But this seems to be mainly due to the constitutional status of the right. In both law and morality, many rights are rather trivial in nature.
In moral terms, these rights can sometimes even be rightly compensated by considerations of personal convenience (cf. Raz 1978). Similarly, it appears that many rights may, prima facie, be annulled by what the Court considers to be considerations of general interest. Dworkin`s (1977) response to the latter type of criticism has been to argue that, on closer inspection, the consideration directed against the law can itself be seen as an instantiation of another general law. However, this depends on the contentious assertion that the only considerations on which the courts can legitimately rely are pre-existing rights. It was also objected that, as a general theory of the nature of rights, it risked being self-destructive, since any consideration whatsoever could be considered to be based on law, leaving no particular role for the law in practical reasoning.