The main objective of the dissertation is to identify the contours and main foundations of feminist critiques of the law, the State and theories of justice, highlighting the tensions present in the discussions on the subject. To do so, it systematizes and puts into dialogue the arguments and positions of two theorists: Catharine MacKinnon and Martha Nussbaum. The general aim of the research, therefore, was to analyze these two distinct theoretical projects and compare them in order to illuminate relevant points of feminist critique of law. The specific objectives that guided the present study were: i) to analyze the general lines of the diagnoses of the authors on gender inequality; ii) to understand the different interpretations of the role of the State and the law or normative formulations on justice that relate to gender equality; iii) to identify tensions between feminism and law.The first author, Catherine MacKinnon, presents a diagnosis of male domination and a proposal for a feminist analysis of the state and law, formulating a critical examination of the potentialities and limitations of the law in confronting the subordination of women.Martha Nussbaum also formulates reflections on gender inequality and, in addition, presents a normative theory of justice based on a liberal conception of feminism. Finally, this work explores the relationships between the theoretical paradigms of the authors, as well as maps the main criticisms addressed to them by other authors in the field.Examination of the convergences and contrasts between the formulations of the authors demonstrates the complexity of the debates on the horizons and strategies of the struggle for gender equality. From this analysis, the dissertation presents, as final considerations, the tensions that permeate the relations between law and gender equality.