Court Opinion

ID: 9430982
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:31:03.721256+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:23:26.624731
License: Public Domain

Justice Blackmun,
concurring.
I join Justice Brennan’s opinion. I would go further, however, and hold that the practice — federal or state — of *815appointing an interested party’s counsel to prosecute for criminal contempt is a violation of due process. This constitutional concept, in my view, requires a disinterested prosecutor with the unique responsibility to serve the public, rather than a private client, and to seek justice that is unfettered. See Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen & Enginemen v. United States, 411 F. 2d 312, 319 (CA5 1969); see generally Note, Private Prosecutors in Criminal Contempt Actions under Rule 42(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 54 Ford. L. Rev. 1141, 1146-1166 (1986).