Spanish domestic-violence convictions and repeated breaches of restraining/no-contact orders could be treated as “crimes involving moral turpitude” for UK or US purposes, the answer differs substantially between the two countries.
United States
The US concept is a specific immigration-law test. Under INA §212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I), a person can be inadmissible if convicted of, or in certain circumstances admits committing, a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT). Travel State
Crucially, the fact that something was called “domestic violence” does not automatically answer the CIMT question. US immigration authorities examine the statutory offence of conviction and the elements of that offence. The State Department expressly says the determination is based on the nature and wording of the statute under which the person was convicted. Family Assistance Management
US decisions have, however, found particular domestic-violence offences to involve moral turpitude. For example, a USCIS decision concerning an Ohio statute criminalising knowingly causing or attempting to cause physical harm to a family or household member treated those particular convictions as CIMTs. USCIS
Other domestic-violence offences have not automatically qualified. USCIS decisions discuss cases where a domestic relationship, without an additional sufficiently serious element in the statutory offence, was not enough by itself. USCIS
So, for a Spanish conviction, the exact Spanish Penal Code article, wording of the conviction and sentence would need to be examined against US CIMT principles. You cannot safely conclude simply from the label “domestic violence.”
Repeated breaches of a restraining order
These are potentially significant, but again the precise offence matters.
A conviction for breaching a court-imposed prohibition is a separate criminal matter from the underlying domestic-violence offence. For US immigration purposes, the question would be whether the particular Spanish offence of conviction contains the elements that US immigration law regards as involving moral turpitude.
Multiple convictions can also matter independently under US immigration law. INA §212(a)(2)(B), for example, contains a separate ground concerning two or more convictions where the aggregate sentences to confinement total five years or more, regardless of whether the offences involve moral turpitude. Travel State
United Kingdom
The terminology is different.
“Crime involving moral turpitude” is not the central UK immigration test in the way it is under US immigration law. UK immigration decision-making concerning criminality uses its own statutory framework and Immigration Rules.
For example, current Home Office guidance addresses deportation of foreign nationals on criminality grounds and was updated in 2026 following changes to the UK Borders Act and other legislation. GOV.UK
There is also specific Home Office guidance concerning criminality and Article 8 cases. GOV.UK
The important distinction
If you’re dealing with a person who has, for example:
- a Spanish domestic-violence conviction;
- another domestic-violence conviction;
- one or more convictions for breaching a court-imposed restraining/no-contact order; and
- potentially repeated breaches,
then the legally useful question isn’t simply:
“Is this moral turpitude?”
It is:
“What were the exact offences of conviction, under which Spanish statutory provisions, what sentences were imposed, and how would those convictions be classified under the immigration law of the country concerned?”
For the US, the CIMT analysis can be very important.
For the UK, the analysis is instead principally under the UK’s criminality and deportation/immigration framework.
