The Habitual Drunkard and His Immoral Character

When someone is called an alcoholic, it is rarely considered a compliment. But is alcoholism such an iniquitous trait that it justifies the deportation of an illegal alien?

While Congress may think so, the Ninth Circuit considered the idea to be absolutely ridiculous and decided to take a stand on the morality of alcoholism. In Salomon Ledezma-Cosino V. Loretta E. Lynch, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Congress's inclusion of 'habitual drunkard’ as a type of “bad moral character” in order to limit a non-citizen's eligibility for cancellation or voluntary departure is unconstitutional. Under the guise of the equal protection clause, the court found that there is no rational basis for classifying persons afflicted by chronic alcoholism as persons who lack good moral character.

According to the NIH, roughly 7% of Americans 18 and older suffer from an alcohol use disorder. The majority reasoned that chronic alcoholism is a medical condition that produces an irresistible urge to constantly consume alcohol. Because of this inability to say no to the hooch, the court stated that like any other medical condition, alcoholism is undeserving of punishment and should not be held morally offensive.

Just Put the Drink Down You Sick Alien

After a rather fiery oral arguments, it is no surprise that Judge Clifton sees the issue completely differently than the majority. In his dissent, Clifton list several reasons why Congress has the right to use a habitual drunkard standard if they so choose. First, he says a 'rational basis' hurdle is easily cleared, relying mainly on Congress' plenary powers over aliens.

Clifton then goes on to trash the idea that being a habitual drunkard is even a medical condition. He seems to be of the belief that all alcoholics have the free will to stop drinking whenever they please. To jam his dissent even further down the majority’s throat, he states that even if being a habitual drunkard is a medical condition, Congress has the power to "decide that the country should not accept or harbor sick aliens who might infect others or whose treatment might impose heavy costs."

This could be an interesting opinion to keep tabs on if it gets appealed. Whether or not being a "habitual drunkard" and having "bad moral character" are intertwined should be an issue that hits close to home for most lawyers. Because if the two are synonymous, becoming and staying a lawyer is going to to be awfully difficult for those trying to pass a state bar moral character test.