Philosophy tends to relegate senses to the realm of phe-nomenology and experience. By contrast, critical the-ory has gradually eroded the holy opposition between knowing and sensing to the extent that new speculative trends are now seeking to rebuild it. While the social sciences endeavour to frame sensing within socio- historical geneal ogies, scientific research draws deter-ministic connections between our sensing the world and the neurophysics hardware. At the same time, planetary modifications gesturing towards the seemingly unavoid-able extinction of human ity suggest ‘post’ human ways of sensing, with novel tech nologies that enable us to understand things that escape human capacity to sense, thus widening up perception to inhuman scales and tem-poralities. Meanwhile, capitalism relentlessly crafts our sensorial immersion into hyperaesthetic atmospheres, mirrored by art’s ongoing fetishisation of site-specificsensoriality.Law is present in all this, and with a complexity that is yet to be addressed in the current sensorial turn in legal thinking.2In fact, law and the senses have been mostly explored through the usual law vs. ‘what escapes law’ framework, one that characterises many of the ‘law and...’ approaches (e.g. law and space, law and material ity etc.). In other words, the tendency in most cases has been that of remaining trapped within a phenomenological under-standing of senses, oscillating between two sides (law vs. the senses) of an unquestioned opposition, occupying each of the sides of the partition without fully explor-ing its promising threshold.