What's the difference between any (one) individual Supreme Court Justice and Federal judges?

i didn't know this (or maybe i did but forgot my Civics), but a Supreme Court Justice is a type of Federal Judge...

Today, the nine justices on the Supreme Court are
the only U.S. judges — state or federal — not
governed by a code of ethical conduct. But that
may be about to change. Justice Elena Kagan recently
testified during a congressional budget hearing that Chief
Justice John Roberts is exploring whether to develop an
ethical code for the Court. This was big news, given that
the chief justice has previously rejected the need for a
Supreme Court ethics code.

In fact, however, the Supreme Court regularly faces
challenging ethical questions, and because of their
crucial and prominent role, the justices receive intense
public scrutiny for their choices. Over the last two decades,
almost all members of the Supreme Court have been criticized
for engaging in behaviors that are forbidden to other
federal court judges, including participating in partisan
convenings or fundraisers, accepting expensive gifts or
travel, making partisan comments at public events or in
the media, or failing to recuse themselves from cases
involving apparent conflicts of interest, either financial or
personal. Congress has also taken notice of the problem.
The For the People Act, which was passed in March 20
by the House of Representatives, included the latest of a
series of proposals by both Republican and Democratic
legislators to clarify the ethical standards that apply to
the justices’ behavior.

Much of the Supreme Court’s power comes from the public’s
trust in the integrity and fairness of its members. Controversies
over the justices’ ethical choices threaten this trust at a time when
faith in our democratic institutions is already low. In this era of
hyperpartisanship, when confidence in the Supreme Court is
imperiled by the rancor of recent confirmation battles and ongoing
criticism from the president, the Court’s decision to adopt its own
ethical reforms would send a clear and powerful message about
the justices’ commitment to institutional integrity and independence.
Moreover, voluntarily adopting a code (rather than waiting for
Congress to impose one) could actually enhance the Court’s power
by building the Court’s credibility and legitimacy with the public,
thereby earning support for its future decisions.

This white paper provides a brief overview of the
current judicial ethics framework and highlights three
changes that the Court could adopt right now to bring
clarity and transparency to the ethical standards governing
the nation’s most powerful jurists:

ƒ adopting its own Code of Conduct;

ƒ establishing a regular practice of explaining its
recusal decisions; and

ƒ strengthening its rules governing gifts and financial
disclosures.

The justices’ embrace of these reforms would end the long-standing
debate about why the nation’s highest court lacks the kind of written
ethical code that is increasingly ubiquitous, not only for government
officials but also in schools, private corporations, and many other
organizations. It would also reestablish the U.S. Supreme Court as a
beacon of accountability and rule of law at a moment when these core
democratic principles are under attack, domestically and around the
world.

What's the difference between any (one) individual Supreme Court Justice and Federal judges?