The idea of law's neutrality perceives judicial adjudication to be detached and formalistic, and this suppresses fears about legal uncertainty and partiality. Contrary to this orthodoxy, the author proposes that legal decisions create distance from their author through specialised juridical language and techniques. Despite judicial attempts to abide by the demands of neutrality, the influence of personal values is unavoidably prescriptive. This chapter begins by considering the theoretical reliance on a conception of judicial practice that is controlled by the imposition of legalistic filters. To introduce the dominant scholarly treatment of judicial subjectivity, the chapter considers Ronald Dworkin's conception of judicial practice. The chapter assesses the conceptual tools of habitus, capital and field and argues that the agent cannot be removed in the manner proposed by neutrality; rather, they come to deliberation engaging not just juridical capital but also their categories of perception.