Vision magistrate neoconstitutionalism, problems and scope as to the discretion

Abstract

The Neoconstitutionalism has put the judges in a place of extreme responsibility, leaving aside the positive thinking of subsuming the law, a coupling the human behavior to the rule; in this work attached a conception of a union of law and morality, that is to say, and taking the words of Carlos M. Cárcova, consider the law as an as speech, this is as a social process of creation of meaning, as a discursive social practice that is more than just words; it is also behavior, symbols, knowledge. I do not think it is so preposterous that detachment from the law and morality, as the union of these elements in a proper manner allows to rescue the normativity without exaggerating its role; the autoproduction operational of the right, without reducing it to mere predictions of the judges; incorporating the dimensions of the constantly changing society. In this paper I have some ideas about the interpretation of the rules in a direction that will lead to a broader spectrum in terms of the elements that a judge can have in order to ensure that it does not limit to search for in the Law a response that many times is not legislated and enacted.