This article interrogates how the term ‘queer’ has come to be used in law. I ask whether ‘queer’ performs the same analytical work as ‘sexual subaltern’, or whether it has become aligned to a more sanitised LGBT politics based on fixed identities and positionalities. Reading the Naz Foundation judgment delivered by the Delhi High Court in 2009 and its legal aftermath, I argue that the voice of the sexual subject emerges as somewhat muted in comparison to its articulation in broader cultural and public spaces within which queer agitation has occurred. Exploring the limits and possibilities of ‘queer’ in the law, I interrogate, above all, what ‘queering the law’ might entail.