Supreme Court of the United States

Turner v. Rogers

June 20, 2011564 U.S. 431

Summary

The Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause does not automatically require a state to provide appointed counsel to an indigent non‑custodial parent in a civil contempt proceeding that may lead to incarceration, so long as alternative procedural safeguards are in place. The Court also found the case was not moot because the contempt action is “capable of repetition, yet evading review.” Justice Thomas, dissenting, would have affirmed the state court’s judgment and rejected the majority’s reliance on new procedural safeguards.

Holding

  • Whether the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause requires appointed counsel in civil contempt proceedings involving incarceration of an indigent non‑custodial parent.. The Due Process Clause does not automatically require the State to provide counsel in such civil contempt proceedings when the custodial parent is unrepresented and the State provides alternative procedural safeguards.
  • Whether the case is moot after Turner completed his sentence.. The case is not moot because the contempt action is “capable of repetition, yet evading review.”

Docket 10-10

Cited authorities

  • 42 U.S.C. §§608
  • 42 U.S.C. §§666
  • Rule 14.1(a)
  • S.C. Code Ann. §63
  • 28 U.S.C. §1257
  • S.C. Code Ann. §§43
  • 112 Stat. 618
  • 106 Stat. 3403

Cited by

Read full opinionPDF