The Conceptual Utility of Malum prohibitum
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9688176 |
|---|---|
| Authors | STUART P GREEN (0000-0001-6559-2471, Rutgers Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 55 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 33-43 |
| Publication date | 2016-03-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Dialogue (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0012-2173 • E-ISSN: 1759-0949 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0012217315000025 |
| OpenAlex | W3122674650 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 5 |
As a means for thinking more precisely about the moral content of criminal offenses, this article argues that we should think of malum in se and malum prohibitum not as binary categories into which an offense does or not fit, but rather as contrasting, scalar qualities that all criminal offenses, to one degree or another, possess. Under this approach, an offense is malum in se to the extent that it criminalizes conduct that is morally wrong independent of the law, while it is malum prohibitum to the extent it criminalizes conduct that is morally wrong (if at all) in virtue of its being illegal
Criminal law · Criminology · Epistemology · Law and economics · Political science · Sociology · Virtue · Free Will and Agency · Law · Philosophy · Psychology · Torture, Ethics, and Law · War, Ethics, and Justification
| Citations per year | 0.1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2016 - 2016 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |