Critical legal studies believe that there exist no rational, scientific, or neutral elements in law; for this matter nothing would influence the outcome of a particular case (Vago 2009, p. 72). This movement further argues that law cannot settle on logical judgments and conclusions since it is full of contradiction and prejudice. Moreover, it is there to defend the rights of the wealthy in the society (Vago 2009, p. 76). Feminist Legal theory believes that law only seeks to protect one gender, for instance, males at the detriment of females in the society (Vago 2009, p.
71). However, this assertion is widely opposed by the critical studies of masculinity movement (Vago 2009, p. 72). It contends that men succumb to similar oppression as women go through. Although US, through affirmative action, has entrenched laws to defend the rights of women, there is a push to institutionalize the calls by men to have laws that protect them as well (Vago 2009, p. 72). Feminism has occasioned others studies like lesbian legal theory which this study believes they might not augur well with US legal system.
Critical Race Theory (CRT) “It is an eclectic, dynamic and growing movement in law with close to 900 leading law review articles and dozens of books directly or indirectly devoted to it” (Vago 2009,p. 73). This movement believes that American society has not been able to eliminate the root causes of racial inequality in its legal system (Vago 2009, p. 75). It also believes that discrimination, oppression, inequality, and lack of diversity still infect the legal profession (Vago 2009, p. 73). It is worthwhile to note that US Common Law System rests on judge-made law.
It does not advocate for legislative law or codified law. Functionalism can fit in such a legal system since it aims to secure a balanced social and democratic order. Marxist approach may not augur well with US legal system due to its codified characteristic. Critical legal studies utterly contradict the very principles of US legal system where the judges can make logical judgments without the fear of contradiction. The same case applies to Critical Race Theory since US is confident with its legal system and depend on it to dispense justice.