Critical Legal Realism
Critical Legal Realism
Critical Legal Realism
Group 13
Cruz, Keneth Joyce S.
Ventura, Meynard Abram M.
CRITICAL LEGAL REALISM
• The Critical Legal Studies Movement was
formally organized at the First Conference on
Critical Legal Studies held in May of 1977 at the
University of Wisconsin.
• This Movement has won adherents in France, in
Germany, in Canada, in England and in the
Philippines.
CRITICAL LEGAL REALISM
• The Critical Legal Realism was introduced in the
Philippines in 1988 as part of the course in Legal
Theory in the College of Law of the University of
the Philippines.
CHALLENGE to the TRADITION of the
DOMINANT LIBERAL PARADIGM
• The task of a GOOD LAW SCHOOL is to provide
a legal education which frees the minds of
professors and students alike from the grips of
the dominant liberal paradigm and to
delegitimize the improper and illicit tie between
law and politics.
CRITICAL LEGAL SCHOLARSHIP
SCORNED
CRITICAL LEGAL SCHOLARSHIP
SCORNED
• “…illegitimate descendants of the modern legal realist school of
jurisprudence.”
-Richard Posner of the US Court of Appeals
• The kinship claimed by the critical legal scholars to the modern
school of legal realism “is a grasp at legitimacy”
-G. Edward White, Professor of Law
University of Virginia
• “the academic left subculture.”
-Cornel West, Professor of Religion
Princeton University
POLEMICS VS. CRITICAL LEGAL
REALISM
POLEMICS VS. CRITICAL LEGAL
REALISM
• The Critical Legal Realism is a critique directed
against many aspects of the dominant liberal
paradigm.
▫ Included therein are the “ways in which the
language of impartiality, objective due process,
and value-free procedures hide and conceal
partisan operations of power and elite forms of
social victimization.”
POLEMICS VS. CRITICAL LEGAL
REALISM
• Some proponents of the dominant liberal
paradigm have branded critical legal realism as
another form of radical socialism, no different
from the critical socialism of Karl Marx.
▫ As stated by Karl Marx, “the bourgeois concept of law is but the
will of the dominant elite erected into legislation, a will whose
essential character and direction are determined by material
and economic conditions of the existence of the class.”
CRITICAL SOCIAL REALISM
VS.
CRITICAL LEGAL REALISM
The difference between the two theories is
that the critical social realism of Marx is
leftist oriented while the critical legal
realism of Unger is not. Unger stated that
his, “social theory is an alternative to Marxism”
not a reaffirmation but a staunch denial of the
bourgeois plan of social division and hierarchy.
DECONSTRUCTION OF DOMINANT
LEGAL PARADIGM
DECONSTRUCTION OF DOMINANT
LEGAL PARADIGM
• The term “deconstruction” is used by the Critical Legal
Studies Movement as a method or technique of:
▫ 1) stinging inquiry and analysis of the tendencies, beliefs,
attitudes, and interpretations of the dominant liberal
paradigm, and
▫ 2) internal reformation and development of the ideas
and concepts of the dominant liberal paradigm by the
presentation of the rationale or justification for the
censure and the offer of alternative solutions.
TRASHING THE TRADITION OF THE
DOMINANT LEGAL PARADIGM
• The Critical Legal Realists have discovered that in the
liberal legal order, there is a free rather than a just
society characterized by widening divisions and
sharpening hierarchies and a jealous special-interest
economy marked by exploitative, individualistic, and
possessive propensities to control the social, economic,
political, and legal processes of society through the
subtle use of power and resources.
TRASHING THE TRADITION OF THE
DOMINANT LEGAL PARADIGM
• Three undesirable situations in the contemporary liberal order were
identified by the critical legal realists.
• These are:
▫ 1) the state has become the organization of the dominant liberal class;
▫ 3) the social structure has become so divided and hierarchied that status
and position therein are being determined by irrelevant inequalities.
• Objectivism
It is not the cognizable extrinsicality of legal concepts and legal rules.
It is the liberal view that the contemporary legal order, including the
built-in institutional structures that undergird it, is already sufficient
to sustain society and, therefore, no reason exists to complain about it.
• Formalism
It is not so much the application of legal rules on the facts involved in
a conflict of interests that is attacked as it is:
1) over-dependence on legal rules; and
2) assumption that the legal order is non-partisan in the
adjustment of conflicting interests.
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM
• Otherwise known as judicial legislation.