Vast social inequality – still a noticeable characteristic in Brazil – continues to have repercussions on criminal behavior. Even with the re-democratization of the country and the most ‘citizen-friendly’ Constitution in its history, the question of crime is still related to indices of misery and social exclusion. Judicial activities, in the light of actual Constitutionalism, is replete with potential and corrective tools or attenuation of inequality or selective treaty dispensed to jurisdiction by determined legal devices and by state administration. This paper demonstrates some theoretical considerations, based on Habermas’ deliberative democracy, Marxism and Alessandro Baratta’s critique of crime (all revelations in the inequality of the bourgeois penal system); furthermore, the paper seeks to investigate the level of (in)efficiency of the jurisdictional device in managing these tools, touching on issues of criminal questions that involve citizen’s constitutional predications, particularly isonomic treatment and the coherency of sentencing. Set signals of capture of the jurisdictional function by conservative forces of the current structure further heighten the factor of inequality and oppression of the penal system and shed doubt on the judicial system itself, including in the use of unmeasured discretional power, which, in turn, leads to the call for alternatives and actions to change the process. In the end of the paper, some interpretive and motivational positions are suggested in the hopes of refining the use of jurisdictional discretion, thus leading to some possible proposals leading toward democratization of Justice, professional training and the constitution of subjectivity of professionals in the judicial field.