I recently taught Gideon for the first time and learned quite a bit. For example, I knew next to nothing about Bruce Jacob, who argued the case for Florida. He’s a remarkable person who went on to make significant contributions to indigent criminal defense (as well as serving as a law school Dean). Earlier this year, he published a book about Gideon, and I recently emailed with him about his first-rate brief in the case. (He’s 91 now). Just another example of strong arguments that received 0 votes on the Court.
It’s also useful to pose the issue as “Does due process require a party to have a lawyer?” This framing removes Gideon from the Sixth Amendment context and broadens the inquiry to focus more on the interest at stake or the nature of the proceeding. I don’t have any answers to suggest. Just questions.