Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Rohit v. Holder (9th Cir. - Feb. 29, 2012)

This one's timely.  At least for me.

I probably agree with Judge Wallace's opinion as a matter of precedent.  Soliciting a prostitute is indeed a crime of moral turpitude.

But see if you agree with the following statement in the opinion:  "[S]ex between an adult and a minor may be prohibited, but it is not inherently morally turpitudinous. . . . Prostitution, on the other hand, and solicitation thereof, always involves sexual exploitation."  (Similarly:  "[S]olicitation of prostitution is always base, vile and depraved.")

I wonder if Judge Wallace thinks the same is true about visiting a strip club.  Or Anna Nicole Smith marrying J. Howard Marshall.  Or the numerous "sugar daddy" web sites.  Or visiting a Hooters.

Does trading sex (or other sexual/nonsexual conduct) for money always involve explotiation?  Is it never truly consensual?  Does it matter if you're trading sex as opposed to something else?

Maybe.  Now onto my 1:00 p.m. "Law of Love" class.  Which is all about precisely that.