This paper challenges a common opinion whereby Neil MacCormick’s legal theory is an internal revision of Herbert Hart’s approach. I shall not deny that MacCormick’s thought embodies some relevant legal-positivist features. My claim is rather that, important as these assumptions can be, they are not sufficient to classify his theory as positivist. In fact MacCormick’s focus on legal reasoning has progressively led him to embrace some central, non-positivist theses that seem to presuppose a rather different legal perspective, which I refer to as “non-objectualism.” After introducing the notion of non-objectualism and reconstructing its general features, I will argue that MacCormick’s theory is best considered a balanced and moderate version of the non-objectualist legal view.