Symposium on Turner v. Rogers to be Hosted on ConcurringOpinions Blog — I’ll Moderate with David Udell

I am excited to be scheduled to be moderating, with David Udell, a flash blog Symposium to be hosted on  It will focus, when it come down, on the upcoming US Supreme Court decision in Turner v. Rogers, the pending “Civil Gideon” case.

Below is the full text on the announcement, including the list of experts we have recruited to participate.  I will post an announcement to this list as soon as the Symposium actually launches.  This should be very soon (hours) after the opinions come down.

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 will sponsor 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.  Two experts in residence will moderate:  Richard Zorza, expert in self-represented litigation and blogger at Access to Justice, and David Udell, Director of the National Center for Access to Justice.  The list of participants is after the leap:

When the Supreme Court decides Turner, we hope you’ll join us for expert analysis of the decision and its consequences.


About richardzorza

I am deeply involved in access to justice and the patient voice movement.
This entry was posted in Access to Counsel, Judicial Ethics, Supreme Court. Bookmark the permalink.