This chapter argues that feasibility judgments are inherently value-laden and that recognizing this value dimension helps address two key conceptual challenges in the feasibility debate. It begins by introducing the widespread assumption that feasibility is a purely descriptive concept and that this notion helps separate scientific facts from values. The chapter then surveys conceptual contributions that challenge this separation and argues for a “thick” conception of feasibility, building on Wiens’ account. The proposed thick conception integrates value judgments in three ways: by excluding unacceptable means, rejecting measures with unacceptable side effects, and setting value-laden thresholds for acceptable levels of uncertainty. This value-laden understanding of feasibility addresses the first challenge of distinguishing feasibility from mere practical possibility. The chapter argues that the normative role of feasibility as ruling out proposals can be refined as demarcating options that are worthy of deliberation. This sense of ruling out is compatible with thick feasibility. Finally, it recovers the comparative sense of feasibility through related, value-laden concepts—such as options being “more challenging” or “more realistic”—thereby addressing the second challenge.