Legal Realism RevisitedFocusing on Jerome Frank

Under the background of constructing China’s independent legal knowledge system, it is necessary to revisit legal realism and explore its value to Chinese legal theory and practice. There are some deficiencies in the current research on legal realism in China. The research on Frank lays too much emphasis on his extreme views, but does not pay attention to his constructive views, and his juristic thought in judicial judgments. In addition, few scholars have made reflection on the distinction between rule-scepticism and fact-scepticism, and explored whether there is any novelty in the theory of judicial adjudication of legal realism. The judicial decisions written by Frank show that he focuses on legal facts and stresses the facts of cases. He does not deny the role of legal rules and has a comprehensive knowledge of the role of judges. However, his distinction between rule-skepticism and fact-skepticism is not persuasive. Tamanaha’s view that there is nothing new in the theory of judicial adjudication of legal realism cannot be justified. Through the study of Frank, the study can reveal the insights of legal realism and its current value in China.