In contemporary American jurisprudence, there are many different legal-theoretical courses, orientations and legal schools. In this work, the author tries to analyze jusnaturalism and legal positivism. The reason for commitment for these two legal theories the author finds in the fact that they are actually modern forms of theories with a rich philosophical tradition. The paper argues that the jusnaturalism is the oldest philosophical tradition. Legal positivism was developed in opposition to jusnaturalism in the mid-19th century. The author points out that contemporary American jurisprudence marks the conflict between jusnaturalism and legal positivism. The main reason for their disagreement is the question of the relationship between law and morality. The paper analyzes the differences between the modern version of legal positivism and jusnaturalism and their classical theories. It is noticeable that the modern versions are purified and softened versions of the classic theories. The author concludes that a kind of mitigation of positivist-jusnaturalism dispute has already begun. Finally, the author allows that in the further development of contemporary American jurisprudence a significant convergence of legal positivism and jusnaturalism can reasonably be expected.