TOPIC: TURNER V. ROGERS

Turner v. Rogers: A Decision from the Supreme Court of the United States

Is an indigent parent facing imprisonment for failure to pay child support entitled to appointed counsel?
In South Carolina, indigent parents who fail to make court-ordered child support payments can be held in civil contempt and imprisoned without a lawyer. The ACLU joined with other civil rights and criminal justice organizations and filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in support of Mr. Turner on January 12, 2011.  

In its opinion on Turner v. Rogers on June 20, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court said that S.C. has a constitutional duty to make sure that when people are imprisoned for not paying child support, it is because they would not, rather than could not, pay.  The ruling in Turner v. Rogers makes clear that the procedures South Carolina is using are unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court of the US majority opinion (final paragraph):

The record indicates that Turner received neither counsel nor the benefit of alternative procedures like those we have described. He did not receive clear notice that his ability to pay would constitute the critical question in his civil contempt proceeding. No one provided him with a form (or the equivalent) designed to elicit information about his financial circumstances. The court did not find that Turner was able to pay his arrearage, but instead left the relevant “finding” section of the contempt order blank. The court nonetheless found Turner in contempt and ordered him incarcerated. Under these circumstances Turner’s incarceration violated the Due Process Clause. We vacate the judgment of the South Carolina Supreme Court and remand the case for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. It is so ordered.   – 06/20/11

Further reading:  Commentary from the Brennan Center >>