Enlightenment Of Legal Realism On China’s Judicial Issues

Legal realism is that legal formalism cannot respond to the actual needs of society and solve social problems,and society is in a rapid change.There is an urgent need to have a concept in response to social calls.It was born and gradually developed.Legal realists criticize legal formalists for being bound by conceptual frameworks and syllogistic reasoning.Judicial activities are stubborn in the face of legal rules and the factual uncertainty of case facts.They cannot keep up with the pace of social changes and are not The consideration of social goals and social values??in judicial activities ultimately resulted in a huge gap between the results of judicial judgments and social reality.The operation of the law was affected,and it increasingly deviated from the original purpose of the law.Legal realism has a profound impact on American judicial practice: it subverts the formalist judgment method,promotes the formation of a problem-oriented judicial concept,and considers social factors in the judgment results.Analysis of the environment in which we live can see the shadow of the rise of legal realism: the judiciary as a whole is formalistic,the judgment does not pay attention to social factors or irrational social factors,and the social effect of judgment is poor,etc.Therefore,the law Realism has provided us with very good intellectual resources and enlightening help for at least analyzing and understanding these problems.In order to think about and explore the inspiration of legal realism to solve ourown judicial problems,this article mainly contains the following contents: The first part discusses the similarities and differences between the rise of legal realism and the current social characteristics of our country.By summarizing the similarities and differences between the legal background of the rise and development of legal realism and the current social development in my country,the rationality and possibility of reference and reference to some parts of legal realism are clearly defined and the boundaries of reference and reference are clearly defined.The second part focuses on the legal concept advocated by legal realism and its relationship with American judicial practice.The legal view of legal realism mainly includes rule skepticism and fact skepticism,legal functionalism and rule refinementism.The analysis of the relationship between legal realism and American judicial practice is mainly because although legal realism has appeared in many places,it is relatively the most influential in the United States,with more scholars and more research results.The relationship between judicial practice has more analytical value and significance.By analyzing the problems discovered by legal realism,the emphasized values and the actual impact in the judiciary,it can be instructive for us to think about our problems and advocate a value.The third part focuses on examining the problems existing in our judiciary from the perspective of legal realism.The specific issues are: judicial formalism toward absoluteness,failure to fully pay attention to social factors,lack of social purpose test for judgment effects,and objective truth theory occupation Dominant position,etc.,and analyze problems on the basis of clear problems.The fourth part focuses on the analysis of how to promote the improvement of my country’s justice under the enlightenment of legal realism.The main content of this part includes what kind of judicial concept to construct,what kind of referee thinking mode to build,and what kind of legal methods to use.But at the same time,we should also pay attention to drawing on and applying legal realism to solve the risks that our judicial problems may cause and adequately regulate them.The reason is that the rule of law is formalistic in nature,and it is built on formalism and rationalism.In a costly world,the justice character that the rule of law can provide is formal justice,and it has sufficient rationality.The meta-method toensure legal legitimacy in the judicial field is also formalism.It is necessary to use legal realism to solve problems,but it is neither necessary nor reasonable to replace the existing formalist judicial approach.This inevitably determines that we must pay attention to legal realism to solve the risks that may result from judicial problems and to regulate: first,to clarify the reference and methodological revelation of legal realism to us still within the open and current legal system,rationalism The rule of law requires us to abide by the current laws and regulations is still the first important,and should not be replaced.Second,it is necessary to limit the scope of extra-legal factors to condensed mainstream values and public will,rather than moving towards judicial arbitrary and absolute discretion.Finally,the judgment should still be based on evidence,to ensure the legality and reasonableness of the judgment,and to allow the judgment to be recognized and respected by the public.