Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cc8bf7c57-fxdwj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-11T10:04:01.226Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Series:   Elements in Philosophy of Law

The Moral Prerequisites of the Criminal Law

Legal Moralism and the Problem of Mala Prohibita

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 September 2023

Ambrose Y. K. Lee  and
Alexander F. Sarch
Ambrose Y. K. Lee
Affiliation:
University of Surrey
Alexander F. Sarch
Affiliation:
University of Surrey

Summary

Modern states criminalise many actions that intuitively do not seem morally wrong, particularly in the context of regulating complex industries or activities. Are mala prohibita offences of this kind fundamentally mistaken? Many criminal law scholars have thought so and argued that conduct must be morally wrong to be legitimately criminalised. This Element examines the longstanding debates about whether this idea is right, and what we would lose if we either abandoned the criminal law's close connection to morality or our use of the very useful tool of mala prohibita crimes. This Element argues that there are a range of promising arguments for reconciling mala prohibita offences with the wrongness constraint on criminalisation. Thus, it seeks to shed light on the aims of the criminal law and the moral prerequisites for legitimate criminalisation.
Get access

Keywords

criminalisationlegal moralismwrongness constraintpunishmentcriminal lawmorality
Type
Element
Information
Series: Elements in Philosophy of Law
Online ISBN: 9781009000659
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 19 October 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, Ryan and Sarch, Alex (2019). ‘Punishing Artificial Intelligence: Legal Fiction or Science Fiction?’, UC Davis Law Review 53: 323–84.Google Scholar
Berman, Mitchell (2012). ‘The Justification of Punishment’, in The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Law, ed. Marmor, Andrei, pp. 141–57, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bero, Steve and Sarch, Alex (2020). ‘The Problem of Over-Inclusive Offenses: A Closer Look at Duff on Legal Moralism and Mala Prohibita’, Criminal Law and Philosophy 14: 395–416.Google Scholar
Buell, Samuel (2011). ‘What Is Securities Fraud?’, Duke Law Journal 61: 548–61.Google Scholar
Cahill, Michael (2011). ‘Punishment Pluralism’, in Retributivism: Essays on Theory and Policy, ed. White, Mark D., p. 25–48, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chase, Mike (2019). How to Become a Federal Criminal, New York: Atria Books.Google Scholar
Chiao, Vincent (2018). Criminal Law in the Age of the Administrative State, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Coleman, Jules (1992). Risks and Wrongs, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cornford, Andrew (2017). ‘Rethinking the Wrongness Constraint on Criminalisation’, Law and Philosophy 36(6): 615–49.Google Scholar
Dagger, Richard (1997). Civic Virtues: Rights, Citizenship, and Republican Liberalism, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dagger, Richard (2016). ‘Crime, Morality, and Republicanism’, in The Routledge Handbook of Criminal Justice Ethics, ed. Jackson, Jonathan and Jacobs, Jonathan, pp. 42–57, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Darwall, Stephen (2006). The Second Person Standpoint, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dimock, Susan (2014). ‘Contractarian Criminal Law Theory and Mala Prohibita Offences’, in Criminalisation: The Political Morality of the Criminal Law, ed. Duff, R. A., Farmer, Lindsay, Marshall, Sandra E., Renzo, Massimo and Tadros, Victor, pp. 151–81, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dimock, Susan (2016). ‘The Malum Prohibitum–Malum In Se Distinction and the Wrongfulness Constraint on Criminalization’, Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review 55: 9–32.Google Scholar
Du Bois-Pedain, Antje (2014). ‘The Wrongfulness Constraint in Criminalisation’, Criminal Law and Philosophy 8: 149–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duff, R. A. (2003). Punishment, Communication, and Community, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Duff, R. A. (2018). The Realm of Criminal Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald (1998). Law’s Empire, 1st ed., Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Edmundson, W. A. (2004). ‘State of the Art: The Duty to Obey the Law’, Legal Theory 10(4): 215–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, James (2017). ‘Criminalisation without Punishment’, Legal Theory 23(2): 69–95.Google Scholar
Edwards, James and Simester, Andrew (2017). ‘What’s Public About Crime?’ Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 37(1): 105–33.Google Scholar
Enoch, David (2014). ‘Authority and Reason-Giving’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 89(2): 296–332.Google Scholar
Feinberg, Joel (1965). ‘The Expressive Function of Punishment’, The Monist 49(3): 397–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joel, Feinberg (1984). Harm to Others: The Moral Limits of the Criminal Law, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Feldman, Fred (2006). ‘Actual Utility, the Objection from Impracticality, and the Move to Expected Utility’, Philosophical Studies 129: 49–79.Google Scholar
Gardner, George K. (1953). ‘Bailey v. Richardson and the Constitution of the United States’, Boston University Law Review 33: 176–203.Google Scholar
Gardner, John (2007). Offences and Defences, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gardner, John (2020). Torts and Other Wrongs, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, John and Zipursky, Ben (2020). Recognizing Wrongs, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Green, Stuart (1971). ‘Why It’s a Crime to Tear the Tag Off a Mattress: Overcriminalization and the Moral Content of Regulatory Offenses’, Emory Law Journal 46: 1533–616.Google Scholar
Green, Stuart (1997). ‘Why It’s a Crime to Tear the Tag Off a Mattress’, Emory Law Journal 46: 1533–1615.Google Scholar
Green, Stuart (2006). Lying, Stealing, and Cheating: A Moral Theory of White-Collar Crime, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hamdani, Assaf (2007). ‘Mens Rea and the Cost of Ignorance’, Virginia Law Review 93: 415–57.Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. (1955). ‘Are There Any Natural Rights?’ The Philosophical Review 64(2): 175–91.Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. (2008). Punishment and Responsibility, 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hershovitz, Scott (2011). ‘Corrective Justice for Civil Recourse Theorists’, Florida State Law Review 39: 107–28.Google Scholar
Hershovitz, Scott (2012). ‘The Authority of Law’, in The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Law, ed. Marmor, Andrei, pp. 65–76, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hershovitz, Scott (2017). ‘Treating Wrongs as Wrongs: An Expressive Argument for Tort Law’, Journal of Tort Law 10: 1–43.Google Scholar
Horton, John (2010). Political Obligation, 2nd ed., Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hoskins, Zachary (2019). Beyond Punishment? A Normative Account of the Collateral Legal Consequences of Conviction, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hume, David (1752). ‘Of the Original Contract’, https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/blogs.cofc.edu/dist/8/406/files/2014/09/David-Hume-Of-the-Original-Contract-1kif9ud.pdf.Google Scholar
Husak, Douglas (2004). ‘The Criminal Law as Last Resort’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 24: 207–35.Google Scholar
Husak, Douglas (2005). ‘Malum Prohibitum and Retributivism’, in Defining Crimes: Essays on The Special Part of the Criminal Law, ed. Duff, R. A. and Green, Stuart, pp. 65–90, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Husak, Douglas (2008). Overcriminalization: The Limits of the Criminal Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Husak, Douglas (2016). Ignorance of Law, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Husak, Douglas (2020). ‘The Price of Criminal Law Skepticism: Ten Functions of the Criminal Law’, New Criminal Law Review 23(1): 27–59.Google Scholar
Kaplow, Louis and Shavell, Steven (2002). Fairness versus Welfare, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Klosko, George (2005). Political Obligations, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kramer, Matthew (2005). ‘Legal and Moral Obligation’, in The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory, ed. Golding, Martin and Edmundson, William, pp. 179–90, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Lee, Ambrose Y. K. (2015). ‘Public Wrongs and the Criminal Law’, Criminal Law and Philosophy 9: 155–70.Google Scholar
Lee, Youngjae (2021). ‘Mala Prohibita and Proportionality’, Criminal Law and Philosophy 15: 425–46.Google Scholar
Lee, Youngjae (2022a). ‘Mala Prohibita, the Wrongfulness Constraint, and the Problem of Overcriminalization’, Law and Philosophy, 41: 375–96.Google Scholar
Lee, Youngjae (2022b). ‘Proxy Crimes and Overcriminalization’, Criminal Law and Philosophy 16: 469–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefkowitz, David (2006). ‘The Duty to Obey the Law’, Philosophy Compass 1(6): 571–98.Google Scholar
Locke, John (1980 [1690]). John Locke: Second Treatise of Government, ed. McPherson, C. B., Indianapolis IN: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart (2003 [1859]). On Liberty. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart (2004 [1861]). Utilitarianism. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Moore, Michael (1997). Placing Blame: A Theory of Criminal Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nozick, Robert (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Rawls, John (1971). A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raz, Joseph (1979). The Authority of Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Raz, Joseph (1994). ‘The Obligation to Obey: Revision and Tradition’, in Ethics in the Public Domain: Essays in the Morality of Law and Politics, pp. 341–54, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Ristroph, Alice (2011a). ‘Responsibility for the Criminal Law’ in Philosophical Foundations of Criminal Law, ed. Duff, R. A. and Green, Stuart, pp. 107–14, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ristroph, Alice (2011b). ‘Criminal Law in the Shadow of Violence’, Alabama Law Review 62: 571–621.Google Scholar
Robinson, Paul (1996). ‘The Criminal-Civil Distinction and the Utility of Desert’, Boston University Law Review 76: 201–14.Google Scholar
Robinson, Paul and Darley, John (1995). Justice, Liability & Blame: Community Views and the Criminal Law, Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, Paul and Darley, John (2014). The Utility of Desert: The Structure and Limits of Criminal Law, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Scanlon, Thomas M. (1998). What We Owe to Each Other, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Simester, Andrew P. (2021). Fundamentals of Criminal Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Simester, Andrew P. (2012). ‘Prophylactic Crimes’, in Seeking Security: Pre-Empting the Commission of Criminal Harms, ed. Sullivan, G. R. and Dennis, Ian, pp. 59–78, Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
Simester, Andrew. P. and von Hirsch, Andreas (2011). Crimes, Harms and Wrongs, Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
Simmons, A. John (1976). ‘Tacit Consent and Political Obligation’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 5(3): 274–91.Google Scholar
Simmons, A. John (1979). ‘The Principle of Fair Play’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 8(4): 307–37.Google Scholar
Simmons, A. John (1981). Moral Principles and Political Obligations, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Simmons, A. John (1987). ‘The Anarchist Position: A Reply to Klosko and Senor’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 16(3): 269–79.Google Scholar
Simmons, A. John (2001). Justification and Legitimacy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, M. B. E. (1973). ‘Is There a Prima Facie Obligation to Obey the Law?’ Yale Law Journal 82(5): 950–76.Google Scholar
Tadros, Victor (2012). ‘Wrongness and Criminalization’ in The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Law, ed. Marmor, Andrei, pp. 157–73, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
The Law Commission (2010). ‘Criminal Liability in Regulatory Contexts’, Consultation Paper No. 195, www.lawcom.gov.uk/app/uploads/2015/06/cp195_Criminal_Liability_consultation.pdf.Google Scholar
Viehoff, Daniel (2014). ‘Democratic Equality and Political Authority’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 42(4): 337–75.Google Scholar
Walen, Alec (2020). ‘Criminal Law and Penal Law: The Wrongness Constraint and a Complementary Forfeiture Model’, Criminal Law and Philosophy 14: 431–46.Google Scholar
Wellman, Christopher H. (2001). ‘Toward a Liberal Theory of Political Obligation’, Ethics 111(4): 735–59.Google Scholar
Wellman, Christopher H. (2013). ‘Rights Forfeiture and Mala Prohibita’, in The Constitution of the Criminal Law, ed. Duff, R. A., Farmer, Lindsay, Marshall, S. E., Renzo, Massimo and Tadros, Victor, pp. 77–96, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wellman, Christopher H. and Simmons, A. John (2005). ‘Natural Duties and the Duty to Obey the Law’, in Is There a Duty to Obey the Law?, pp. 121–88, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, Michael. (2002). ‘Taking Luck Seriously’, The Journal of Philosophy 99(11): 553–76.Google Scholar

Save element to Kindle

To save this element to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The Moral Prerequisites of the Criminal Law
Available formats
×

Save element to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The Moral Prerequisites of the Criminal Law
Available formats
×

Save element to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The Moral Prerequisites of the Criminal Law
Available formats
×