In contemporary democracies, it´s notable the presence of Judicial Branch and Constitutional Courts taking decisions that potentially refers all whole members of a politic community. In Brazil, this phenomenon, called by Judicialization of Politics, braced with the promulgation of the current Constitution. This Constitution, besides to amplify interpretative possibilities, increased the authority of Brazilian Supreme Court in judicial review. To analyse this phenomenon, that causes a shock between Law State and Democracy, it takes theoric debate among the substantialist perspective of Dworkin about democracy and Judicial Review and the procedimentalism of Habermas, whose emphasis in democratic process results in defense of Judicial Branch as guardian of necessary conditions for democracy maintenance. Habermas supposes rationalized potential of dialogue with a wide Constitution interpreters community to produce correct decisions. So, this premise - judicial expansion in Brazil - and this theoric option that bets in dialogue derived from public sphere in the materialization process of constitutional dispositives, this dissertation analyses how Brazilian constituent conceived Brazilian Supreme Court and its access way, for after verify, through Supreme Court decisions, if this tribunal adopts an orientation that favour or not the emergency dialogue of public sphere, notably through recognition of interpreters community to legitimate its decisions.