Due Process May Require Appointment of Counsel in Civil Contempt Cases
Washington, DC (June 20, 2011) – Today
the Supreme Court reaffirmed that freedom “from bodily restraint,” lies
“at the core of the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause.” In Turner v. Rogers,
No. 10-10, a 5-4 majority held that the State of South Carolina
violated a non-custodial parent’s right to due process of law by
sentencing him to a year in jail without a reliable procedure for
determining whether he had the ability to pay back child support or
providing him with counsel to help him prove his case.
Pro bono counsel for Michael Turner, who was jailed for 12 months because
of his inability to pay child support while he was unemployed, hailed
the decision. Greenville, S.C., attorney Derek Enderlin said, “We are
excited about the win and believe that in the long run this will benefit
children more than anyone.” Enderlin is a member of the National
Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL), which filed amicus curiae,
or friend-of-the-court, briefs in support of Mr. Turner in the South
Carolina Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court. Joining NACDL in the
U.S. Supreme Court brief were the Brennan Center for Justice, the
National Legal Aid and Defender Association, the Southern Center for
Human Rights, and the American Civil Liberties Union. NACDL’s briefs arehere (U.S. Supreme Court), and here(S.C. Supreme Court).