The Ninth Circuit has reaffirmed that a Washington conviction for communication with a minor for immoral purposes is a crime involving moral turpitude, citing its prior decision in Morales v. Gonzales, 478 F.3d 972 (9th Cir. 2007) as binding precedent on the issue. The court also determined that it is bound by its own precedent to reject the argument that the phrase “crime involving moral turpitude” is unconstitutionally vague.
Judge Fletcher wrote a lengthy concurrence on why, absent the precedent relied on, the court should find that term is unconstitutionally vague.
The full text of Islas-Veloz v. Whitaker can be found here: