Abstract
Despite its failings, the allure of moral turpitude is undeniable. Historically, it offered the promise of an easy proxy for reputational harm, and then more simply, for a bad reputation with attendant assumptions about character. Still later, the country found itself in need of a way to identify persons who should be prohibited from entry. In 1985, the California Supreme Court proved that moral turpitude is not a relic when it elected to retain the standard, despite its flaws, as a test for impeachment evidence. It may be that the persistence of the standard—beyond a story of congressional disinterest and judicial avoidance—reflects a continuing longing for legal standards that invoke our common conscience. Codes cannot fill all of the gaps, nor do we want them to. At the same time, this Article suggests that we must be wary of the path we take to accomplish that goal.
Recommended Citation
Simon-Kerr, Julia Ann
(2012)
"Moral Turpitude,"
Utah Law Review: Vol. 2012:
No.
2, Article 11.
Available at:
https://dc.law.utah.edu/ulr/vol2012/iss2/11