The expectation of our judges to always act objectively in making their decisions is correct, but only up to a point. Using both Dworkin's and American Legal Realism's theories of interpretation and judicial decision making, it is evident that a balancing act occurs between objective judgments and interpretation and subjective judgments and interpretation. Often, subjective judgments are largely dominant. We must consider Dworkin's ideas considering that judgments have aspects of both objectivity and subjectivity. We must also look at the ideas of American legal realism that subjectivity plays a gigantic role in judgments while leaving objectivity with little or no influence. Dworkin believes in the idea that judges interpret cases and make their decisions as objectively and objectively as possible. the law allows it. However, he also believes that there are gaps in the law that force judges to insert their own judicial discretion, which thus provides us with evidence of the existence of subjectivity in judicial interpretation and decisions. This idea is evident in the case of Riggs v Palmer whereby a murderer was entitled to the benefits of a will even if he was the person who killed the victim to benefit from that will. This demonstrated that the killer was, in fact, acting in line with the law because, in certain circumstances, he was entitled to the benefits of the will, but this was considered problematic. This clearly showed that there was a gap in the law which reiterated what Dworkin said because even if the murderer is acting within the confines of the law, if the court allowed him to benefit from the will, he would create... .the heart of the document ......activities such as judicial decision making and interpretation, is not non-eWorks CitedDenise Meyerson 'Law as Interpretive' in L. Elaine (ed.) Jurisprudence (2013) 135 at 151.Brian Leiter ' American Legal Realism' in Martin P. Golding (ed.) The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory (2008) 50 at 53.Meyerson op cit note 1 at 149.Ibid 151.Ibid 153.Ibid 151.Ibid . Riggs v Palmer 115 NY 506 (1889) at 514.Meyerson op cit note 1 at 151.Ibid 184.Ibid.Ibid 151.Leiter op cit note 2 at 51.Ibid 53.Ibid.Ibid.Ibid 50.Ibid.Ibid 53 .Meyerson op cit note 1 at 149.Ibid.Ibid 188.Ibid 151.Ibid 185.Leiter op cit note 2 at 50.Meyerson op cit note 1 at 188.Leiter op cit note 2 at 50.Ibid.Meyerson op cit note 1 to 149.Ibid 145.Ibid 191.IbidIbid 150.Ibid 145.Ibid184.