Return from Realism

Should Catholic legal theorists swim against the academy's realist current by approaching jurisprudence as legal formalists?  (Consider the recent embrace of formalism by Brian Tamanaha and Larry Solum.)  Here's the tension: the proper ends of law from the Catholic perspective -- e.g., respect for life, economic justice, privileging of the traditional family form -- can easily give rise to an instrumentalist approach to adjudication, whereas legal formalism may be less adept at getting to the preferred outcome on a given issue, particulary if the preferred outcome is not preferred by enough voters to bring about legislative action.  Legal formalists see judges as umpires, and legal realists see judges as lawmakers.  Are Catholics comfortable with judges as umpires?