Despite powerful language recognizing the vital importance of counsel in Powell and Zerbst, the Betts Court majority declined to extend its fundamental fairness due process analysis to encompass the appointment of counsel for indigent defendants during all state criminal proceedings. Key to the majority's analysis was the 1) silence of the Sixth Amendment as to state court proceedings, 2) the historical common law understanding of the right to counsel, and 3) an obligatory adherence to principles of federalism, i.e. allowing the States to decide for themselves when or if the right to counsel is fundamental.
Write an initial post responding to the following questions:
In Justice Hugo Black's dissent, how did he attack each prong of the majority's rationale?
Which argument did you find the most compelling?
Sample Solution