Abstract The special nature of constitutional interpretation is a distinctive feature of contemporary constitutionalism. The justification for this thesis is usually presented in a dispersed and unsystematic way. The purpose of this paper is to reconstruct the arguments that promote the thesis of the special interpretation of the constitution and propose a theoretical model to determine its conceptual scope. In general terms, I argue that the constitution and the techniques of constitutional interpretation do not imply special operations to establish the meaning of the constitutional provisions. The doctrine of special interpretation is justified in constitutionalist conceptions of the law to generate attitudes favorable to the discretionary decisions adopted by the constitutional judge.