Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/10pdf/10-10.pdf
Page Number: 5

Cite as:  564 U. S. ____ (2011) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington,  D. C.  20543,  of  any  typographical  or  other  formal  errors,  in  order
that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 10–10 
_________________ 

MICHAEL D. TURNER, PETITIONER v. REBECCA L. 

ROGERS ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF

SOUTH CAROLINA

[June 20, 2011] 

JUSTICE BREYER delivered the opinion of the Court. 
South Carolina’s Family Court enforces its child support 
orders by threatening with incarceration for civil contempt
those who are (1) subject to a child support order, (2) able 
to  comply  with  that  order,  but  (3)  fail  to  do  so.    We  must 
decide whether the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process 
Clause  requires  the  State  to  provide  counsel  (at  a  civil 
contempt hearing) to an indigent  person potentially faced
with such incarceration.  We conclude that where as here 
the  custodial  parent  (entitled  to  receive  the  support)  is 
unrepresented  by  counsel,  the  State  need  not  provide 
counsel to the noncustodial parent (required to provide the
support).  But  we  attach  an  important  caveat,  namely,
that the State must nonetheless have in place alternative
procedures  that  assure  a  fundamentally  fair  determina-
tion of the critical incarceration-related question, whether
the  supporting  parent  is  able  to  comply  with  the  support
order. 

I 
A 
South Carolina family courts enforce their child support