Campaña
Ética de la Corte Suprema
Los jueces de la Corte Suprema toman decisiones que impactan a millones de personas cada año, pero no están sujetos a los mismos estándares éticos que otros jueces federales.
Tribunales justos
A strong democracy requires protecting everyone’s constitutional rights and ensuring our courts are fair and impartial.
Fair courts are one of the foundations of democracy. Yet today, Supreme Court judges are not held to a binding code of ethics, while many state-level judges are forced to raise money from special interests to sit on the bench, or are selected through an unfair process.
Common Cause advocates for transparency and fairness when it comes to picking judges and shaping our courts. Ensuring that judges are beholden only to the law and keeping courtrooms fair are keys to building a strong 21st-century democracy.
Lo que estamos haciendo
Tomar acción
Petición
Dígale al Congreso: haga que la Corte Suprema rinda cuentas
El Congreso debe tomar medidas audaces ahora para aprobar un Código de Conducta de la Corte Suprema sólido y vinculante y anular el desastroso fallo de la Corte sobre la inmunidad presidencial.
Estas reformas cruciales garantizarían que nadie –ni presidentes ni jueces– esté por encima de la ley.
Petición
Necesitamos un código de conducta REAL para la Corte Suprema
El débil y voluntario “código de conducta” de la Corte Suprema no está a la altura de lo que necesitamos. Exigimos ahora normas éticas REALES y aplicables.
El Congreso debe aprobar la Ley de Ética, Recusación y Transparencia de la Corte Suprema y crear el código de conducta más estricto posible para nuestro tribunal más alto.
Su apoyo financiero nos ayuda a generar un impacto al: Hacer que el poder rinda cuentas y fortalecer la democracia.
Entrada de blog
From Roe To Dobbs: How The Supreme Court Became A Political Weapon
Entrada de blog
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Confirmation Hearing Shows Why She Should Be Confirmed to the Supreme Court
The Senate is considering the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson for a seat on the United States Supreme Court. If confirmed to the high court, she will succeed her mentor, Justice Stephen Breyer, who plans to retire when the Court rises for its summer recess.
Entrada de blog
REACTION: Democrat, Republican leaders criticize Supreme Court for partisan gerrymandering ruling
The Supreme Court decided it would let partisan gerrymandering go unchecked. But the courts aren’t the only path to fair districts. Leaders on both sides of the aisle are chiming in on the issue, and calling out the Supreme Court for its historically bad decision.
Hoja informativa
Moore v. Harper: comprensión de los efectos de la decisión
Una explicación de la victoria de Moore v. Harper y lo que significa para nuestra democracia y los impactos que esta decisión tiene a nivel estatal.
Carta
CARTAS: Los supuestos conflictos de intereses del juez Thomas
Informe
Supreme Conflict
Carta
Letter to the Clerk of the Supreme Court
Prensa
Clip de noticias
USA Today/Gannett: GOP billionaire Harlan Crow purchased property from Justice Clarence Thomas, according to new report
"Americans expect and deserve a fair and impartial Supreme Court and we need transparency in order to identify potential conflicts and to restore public trust in our nation’s highest court,” Common Cause co-president Marilyn Carpinteyro said earlier this week, before the latest revelation. "The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly proven itself incapable of policing itself without a code of ethics."
Presione soltar
SCOTUS Filing: Proceedings in NC Redistricting Case Do Not Change Ability to Decide Moore v. Harper
The U.S. Supreme Court should reject the dangerous and fringe independent state legislature theory (ISLT) presented in Moore v. Harper regardless of the highly unusual decision by the North Carolina Supreme Court to rehear the remedial decision in Harper v. Hall, according to a new plaintiff’s letter responding to the high court.
Clip de noticias
Newsweek: Clarence Thomas Failing to Note Wife Ginni’s $680k Side Income Resurfaces
Law professor Michele Goodwin shared the 2011 article from The Los Angeles Times on Twitter on Monday and tagged Common Cause, the watchdog group that initially reported on Thomas' failure to disclose his wife's income from the Heritage Foundation.
Retweeting Goodwin, Common Cause wrote: "We reviewed Justice Thomas' financial disclosure filings years ago and found that he failed to disclose his wife's income ($686,589) from the Heritage Foundation. We'll keep calling out Ginni Thomas until we have an ethical Supreme Court."
Retweeting Goodwin, Common Cause wrote: "We reviewed Justice Thomas' financial disclosure filings years ago and found that he failed to disclose his wife's income ($686,589) from the Heritage Foundation. We'll keep calling out Ginni Thomas until we have an ethical Supreme Court."