本文將著眼於美國法律唯實論對於社會科學研究（social science research)的強調，以探究法律唯實論何以重視社會科學資源對法律 論證的意義，作為本文的主要關懷，並對此提出筆者個人的解讀。本 文將嘗試指出：經由法律唯實論的提倡而發揚光大的社會科學研究在 當代法領域的重要地位，其實具有一個立基於美國普通法傳統的特殊 發展背景。在唯實論眼中，社會科學研究具有取代形式主義空洞的 Case Method主張，強化司法審判與社會經驗的連結、從而強化司法 民主與司法審判正當性的積極意義。在普通法本即重視透過司法個案 的累積來形成並發展法律真正內涵的前提下，社會科學研究資源的進 駐無疑具有充實普通法實體內容的功能，從而法律唯實論對社會科學 研究地位的強化，當有助於法官在必須兼顧逐案權衡與理性論證的過 程中，透過一個實然面的實體憑據，找到適當的平衡，也能因此而加 強司法審判與現實社會生活、乃至於現實民意之間的聯繫。從這個角 度看來，社會科學研究（特別是對當代美國法發展具有重大影響的 〔法律〕經濟學）在美國的崛起，以及（法律唯實論所理解的）美國 普通法傳統對抽象規範理論的抗拒、對具體經驗的重視，與由此而來 對民主精神的認知，都有密不可分的關係。

While many theories or arguments focus their attention on the so-called counter-majoritarian difficulty of judicial review, the viewpoint of American Legal Realism deserves special attention, since it conceives of democracy not merely as majority rule, but rather as government based on what the people really want, which then must be investigated not only in legislation, but in judicial process. Therefore, it strongly argues for the connection between judicial decisions and concrete social experience and in consequence focuses its attention particularly on the Supreme Court’s investigation of empirical social science, which it believes will improve the Courts’ legal reasoning on democratic grounds and in this way reinforce the democratic legitimacy of the Court’s decision. Thus conceived, Legal Realism regards common law as a specific way to realize democracy, and accordingly provides a framework for the proper role of the Supreme Court. In this view, Legal Realism plays an important role in the American constitutional history not only because it methodologically stands against Formalism, but because it provides a different model for explaining and supporting the democratic legitimacy of judicial review of the US Supreme Court within its common law background.