Before the US Supreme Court began its summer recess, it issued a divided ruling on child support - whether poor people facing jail time for failing to pay child support are entitled to court-appointed lawyers. In the contested 5-4 ruling that divided along ideological lines, the Court said a parent facing civil contempt has no automatic right to representation, at least when the parent seeking to collect child support does not have a lawyer.
The case at issue involved a South Carolina man, Michael D. Turner, who was repeatedly held in civil contempt and jailed for as much as a year at a time for failure to pay child support. Turner contended that he was too poor to stay current on his obligation and that an attorney would've been able to convince the judge that jailing him was impermissible. Justice Breyer's majority opinion, although sympathetic to Turner, was wary of "an asymmetry of representation" when the custodial parent seeking child support has no lawyer.
In a strongly worded dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas said the answer to the simple question the court had agreed to decide was whether a constitutional right to counsel for people facing jail for civil contempt only. He also objected to the court's decision to fashion safeguards based on suggestions from the federal government, which was not a party to the case.
Although North Carolina limits incarcerating parents delinquent on child support to 120 days, the Court has a variety of penalties to impose against parents delinquent on their child support. Call a child support attorney with the Charlotte Law Offices of David P. Sheehan at (704) 332-5858 for a consultation.
