Campagne
Éthique de la Cour suprême
Les juges de la Cour suprême prennent des décisions qui ont un impact sur des millions de personnes chaque année, mais ils ne sont pas tenus aux mêmes normes éthiques que les autres juges fédéraux.
Tribunaux équitables
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.
Ce que nous faisons
Passer à l'action
Pétition
Dites au Congrès : demandez des comptes à la Cour suprême
Le Congrès doit prendre des mesures audacieuses dès maintenant pour adopter un code de conduite de la Cour suprême fort et contraignant et annuler la décision désastreuse de la Cour sur l’immunité présidentielle.
Ces réformes cruciales garantiraient que personne – ni les présidents, ni les juges – ne soit au-dessus de la loi.
Pétition
Nous avons besoin d’un VRAI code de conduite de la Cour suprême
Le « code de conduite » volontaire et peu rigoureux de la Cour suprême ne répond pas à nos besoins. Nous exigeons de VRAIES normes éthiques applicables dès maintenant.
Le Congrès doit adopter la loi sur l’éthique, la récusation et la transparence de la Cour suprême et créer le code de conduite le plus strict possible pour notre plus haute cour.
Votre soutien financier nous aide à avoir un impact en tenir le pouvoir responsable et renforcer la démocratie.
Article de blog
From Roe To Dobbs: How The Supreme Court Became A Political Weapon
Article 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.
Article 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.
Fiche d'information
Moore c. Harper : comprendre les conséquences de la décision
Une explication sur la victoire de Moore contre Harper et ce que cela signifie pour notre démocratie et les impacts de cette décision au niveau de l'État.
Lettre
COURRIER : Les conflits d'intérêts présumés du juge Thomas
Rapport
Supreme Conflict
Lettre
Letter to the Clerk of the Supreme Court
Presse
Extrait d'actualité
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."
Communiqué de presse
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.
Extrait d'actualité
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."