The Chilean constitutional proposal of 2022 was labeled as the most progressive constitution in the world, especially regarding environmental rights and gender equality. It’s a text permeated by a renewed concern for nature and new ways of interacting with the natural world. The proposal, for numerous reasons, was widely rejected by Chileans. However, that did not entail the conclusion of the constitutional process. In a context of climate crisis, the rejection of a text that explicitly acknowledges the existence of a catastrophe and presents mechanisms to deal with it appears as a negative landscape. Against this backdrop, the aim of this article is to analyze the scope and limits of the second chapter of the constitutional proposal, which regards to the Rights of Nature. Specifically, from an ecofeminist perspective, this work is dedicated to those aspects related to environmental justice and the institutions established to protect it. It questions whether the reason for the rejection of the constitutional proposal might be that the language of rights and constitutional clauses could be obsolete in the current context of environmental struggle.