The present dissertation observe the discourse of the fluminense magistracy in the conflicts of the agriculture areas, involving the Rural Workers Without Land Movement - Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra [MST]. The analysis of the discourse was realized using the fragments of the judicial decisions against MST, in the period of the movement restriction in the state - second half of the 1990 decade. The hypothesis of the work is that the hegemonic juridical discourse is characterized as conservative. This guarantees the property right and criminalize the land occupations made by MST. In our work, we used the descriptive theories about the judicial interpretation that detach the politic and valuable contents - therefore ideological - from the jurisdictional activities. In this direction, we will analyze the thesis developed by: Hans Kelsen, Herbert Hart and Alf Ross. They point out the indetermination of the normative text and the creative role played by the judges, connecting the Marxist ideas of Antonio Gramsci, Nicos Poulantzas with the notions of ideological formation and dispute for hegemony - as we can see in our society - from the philosopher Pierre Bourdieu. And so, we searched the hegemonic discourse adopted by the fluminense magistracy about the rural conflicts and the possibilities of ruptures. Thus, we contributed toward the discussions about the juridical thought and his role in the struggle for the democratization of the land access at Brazil.