<b>The Trial of the Allegation of Unconstitutionality number 54: an insight based on Ronald Dworkin

Abstract

The Allegation of Unconstitutionality number 54 was filed in the Brazilian SupremeCourt  by the National Confederation of Health Workers, and the Supreme Court, by eight votes to two, upheld the application, declaring the unconstitutionality of the interpretation that the interruption of pregnancy of anencephalic fetus would be typified in the Criminal Code. Advocating a moral reading of the law, Dworkin argues that the interpretation of substantive principles should consider not only the Constitution as a whole, but also the history, traditions and constitutional practices. Therefore, we intend to articulate the theme of the Allegation of Unconstitutionality number 54 with the Dworkin’s substantialistperspective,  whose proposal for a moral reading can be an important theoretical framework for understanding forms of judicialization aimed at protecting the rights of women with pregnancy of an anencephalic fetus. We intend to demonstrate that, in the judgment of the Allegation of Unconstitutionality number 54, the Brazilian Supreme Courtwas able to consistently justify the concepts that comprise the field of value, articulating them in a way that one direction complements the other, therefore eliminating the conflict.