Item 39: Does normative statics produce a credal constraint, or only a price demand?

The traderized-force interface consumes a price-space region and gives it operative force. The normativity line does not have the arrow into it: Due is a burden on an occasion and Licensed a permission on a response, and neither is a constraint on a credal state or a demand on prices.

Two possible answers, not equivalent. Strong: a reasons/warrants/settlement structure yields a semantic credal constraint C_t ⊆ Δ(Ω_t), and the live worlds, the generalized criterion and the support capacities all follow, force consuming the projection. Weak: it yields only a price-space demand K_t, and no semantics follows — reading live worlds off K_t by preimage is a lift, not a derivation, and the round exhibits two credal sets with the same projection and different live worlds. Deliver whichever is achievable, with a proof if only the weak one is.

Success requires force generation and safety discharge both. Producing C_t or K_t is half the item: the source must also supply a certificate that cumulative enforcement liability over the assessed worlds is bounded, or the quantities the force layer derives one from. A round that compiles a normative region without addressing the outflow account has not answered this.

Narrowed twice. The compiler now has a typed left input — the reason state 𝓡_n, so what was "compile the record" is "select from a stated structure", the arrow the legitimacy line calls R → O; difficulty unchanged. And prefix-closed trace safety supplies none of nonemptiness, closure, convexity or an effective presentation, while existential current-time extraction need not preserve conjunction — so a solution composes the joint liability semantics before extraction, or proves a canonical-event condition, and still discharges the geometric and liability-certificate premises.

Ships: one nontrivial normative fixture; the C_t and/or K_t it generates; a feasibility witness; a rational row presentation the force API accepts; the enforcement position, its conformance at a declared tolerance, and the live-world liability if a semantic C_t exists; and whether the construction respects the settlement, provenance and answerability constraints the line already carries. test-supported at minimum. Acceptance: compile_force accepts the presentation with the supplied witness and returns a certificate whose conformance holds at the fixture's prices, with the liability computed exactly over the implied live worlds. Context: projects/normativity/notes/TRADERIZED_FORCE_INTERFACE.md; projects/normativity/rounds/2026-08-16-traderized-enforcement/SEMANTIC_PROJECTION.md §4 and its INTEGRATION_MAP.md §4; projects/normativity/legitimacy/rounds/2026-08-23-reason-representation/MEMO.md §5; projects/normativity/legitimacy/rounds/2026-08-21-internal-answerability/MEMO.md §7.