Read the following passage.
In the early twentieth century, the Legal Realist movement fundamentally challenged the reigning orthodoxy of Legal Formalism. Formalists maintained that law was a comprehensive and logically consistent system, and that judges arrived at decisions through mechanical deduction from established precedents. Realists, by contrast, argued that legal rules were often indeterminate; they posited that judges typically decided cases based on an intuitive sense of fairness or desired public policy outcomes, only subsequently crafting legalistic rationalizations for their rulings.
While the Realists succeeded in dismantling the illusion of formalist objectivity, contemporary Critical Legal Scholars argue that the Realist project was fundamentally incomplete. According to these later critics, by suggesting that judges were legitimately guided by an intuitive pursuit of "social utility," the Realists inadvertently provided a new justification for the very judicial subjectivity they had just exposed. Critical Legal Scholars maintain that this so-called social utility is rarely a neutral public good, but rather a proxy for the entrenched ideological interests of the dominant class. Consequently, they fault the Realists for failing to recognize the inherently political and stratified nature of all legal adjudication.
Based on the passage, with which one of the following statements regarding the Legal Realists' concept of "social utility" would contemporary Critical Legal Scholars be most likely to agree?
- It serves as an inadequate framework that ultimately obscures the degree to which judicial decisions reinforce the interests of powerful societal groups.Answer
- BIt was a concept intentionally fabricated by the Realists to conceal the political motivations underlying judicial decisions.
- CIt represents a comprehensive and logically consistent system that successfully removes subjectivity from legal adjudication.
- DIt is an indeterminate concept that allows judges to mechanically deduce outcomes from established precedents.
- EIt is a necessary theoretical framework without which the inherently political nature of all legal adjudication could never have been recognized.