Turner v. Rogers Project, Symposium on Concurring Opinions

No one knows what the Supreme Court will do in Turner v. Rogers, but its decision is likely to shape our understanding of access to justice going forward. The issue before the Court is whether an indigent person has a constitutional right to counsel in a civil contempt proceeding that could lead to incarceration for willful failure to pay child support. The Court has many options. It could establish a categorical civil right to counsel, require judges to consider the need for counsel in every case, or determine that states providing counsel in these situations need not do so as a matter of federal law. It could decide that trial judges have specific responsibilities to assist persons without counsel, with implications possibly extending to many classes of cases. Perhaps it could even alter in some way our understanding of the right to counsel recognized in Gideon v. Wainwright. In light of the possibilities and their implications, Concurring Opinions (www.concurringopinions.com) will host The Turner Symposium, an on-line analysis by experts in the field interpreting the decision in real time — as soon as the opinion comes down. David Udell, Director of the National Center for Access to Justice, with Richard Zorza, expert in self-represented litigation and blogger at Access to Justice, will jointly coordinate the on-line symposium. When the Supreme Court decides Turner, we hope you’ll join us for expert analysis of the decision and its consequences. (originally posted June 8, 2011 by David Udell)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

  • DonateNow