The judicial process of psychiatric commitment seeks to affirm equality of persons with mental disorders. Therefore, beyond formalism, the courts have to play an active role in protecting fundamental rights, notably in removing any clinical or social dimension in the decision process. This empirical study highlights serious difficulties for courts in fulfilling this role. The reproduction of inequality and the “therapeutic role” of the court are materialized by rights violations considered as the lesser of two evils since the commitment is clinically or morally justified. In effect, justice is mise en scène insofar it serves purposes other than those explicitly assigned it.