In contemporaneity, it is not possible anymore for lawyers to keep the dichotomy "judges as mouth of the law" versus "judges of principles", or propose axioms as "it is not possible to defend the law". As Dworkin says, the Law is an interpretative concept. Just as reality is itself interpretative. Among this complex matters, takes place the hermeneutical turn: there are no texts that are meaningful in themselves, neither relative interpretations. Furthermore, Law appears only on its norms. But this norm has limits. Why? For the simple reason that we can not say anything about something.