In recent years, we have been able to observe a marked interest in the development of specialized courts and therapeutic justice programs. These have multiplied in several cities – including Toronto and Montreal - and target various social issues, including mental health, homelessness and drug use. Although in certain contexts, these programs seem to show advantages (possibility of avoiding detention, accessing supports and psychosocial intervention), they are also criticized in the academic literature (presumption of innocence, punitive measure imposing therapy, blending of clinical and legal roles). Criminal Defence lawyers is urban centres are well positioned to have insights about specialized courts and how they are useful or not, for their marginalized clients. Drawing from semi-structured interviews with private practice and duty counsel criminal defence lawyers working in Montreal, Toronto, our article aims to identify and understand when and how lawyers talk about one type of specialized courts – Drug Treatment. More specifically, we focus on (1) appreciation; (2) criticism, and (3) alternative strategies. We draw our theoretical framework from the literature on therapeutic and managerial justice, court culture and on the role of criminal defense lawyers. We argue that despite the great differences between the different specialized courts, lawyers are often pushed to refer their clients to these programs, criticizing the fact that they make the criminalization of marginalized people invisible and reify problematic notions of individual responsibility prominent in corrections.