Abstract

Dworkin's last work, "Justice for Hedgehogs", and his dyad responsibility/truth allow to reflect on the relationship between values and legal argumentation. This dyad also points out the relationship between law and morality. Nevertheless the author does not want to discuss about the opposite jus-philosophical thesis concerning this relationship. This paper aims to understand how the argumentative process achieves to put the legal dimension and the ethical one together. Arguing and deciding about values mean to justify the legal decision. Values do not exist as objective facts that can be described. Values have to be argued; they impose a responsible argumentation that cannot be reduced to an exercise of mere interpretation but translates the judge's effort to pursue the truth.