The nine Supreme Court justices are the only judges in the United States who are not governed by a code of ethical conduct. Given that the Supreme Court regularly faces challenging ethical questions and that the justices receive intense public scrutiny for their choices, the lack of an ethics code is concerning. Chief Justice John Roberts is reportedly exploring whether to develop a code for the nation’s most powerful jurists. In these hyper-partisan times, he should move quickly. The adoption of an ethics code would enhance the credibility and legitimacy of the Supreme Court at a moment when our core democratic institutions are unpopular, distrusted, and under attack.

“The Supreme Court should be a model for accountability, not the exception to the rule,” said Alicia Bannon, managing director of the Brennan Center’s Democracy Program and a co-author of the new paper, Supreme Court Ethics Reform. “In failing to establish a code of ethical conduct, the Court has fallen behind the rest of the judiciary, not to mention many universities, companies, and other institutions that depend on the public’s trust.” // Read More

State supreme courts often have the final word when it comes to interpreting and setting precedents for state law. But across the United States, there is a lack of racial, ethnic, and gender diversity on state supreme court benches, as highlighted in the recent Brennan Center report State Supreme Court Diversity. In an interview with Texas Public Radio last week, report co-author Alicia Bannon talked about how Texas’ Supreme Court has become less diverse over the last decade, even as the state’s broader population has grown increasingly diverse. // Texas Public Radio

The FBI placed environmental protesters, such as Helen Yost, on terrorism watchlists, according to files obtained by the Guardian through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The FBI has previously been criticized for using nonviolent civil disobedience as grounds for opening investigations for domestic terrorism. Investigations into Yost and other environmental activists show how “ineffective these internal oversight mechanisms are to preventing abusive and wasteful investigations of nonviolent protesters,” said Brennan Center Fellow Michael German. // The Guardian

The Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) is an industry-led effort launched by Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, and YouTube in response to ongoing regulatory and media pressure from Europe and the United States to stop the online spread of “terrorist content.” But GIFCT’s first transparency report, published in July, doesn’t go far enough in allaying concerns about the initiative’s potentially negative impacts on freedom of expression, according to Ángel Díaz, counsel in the Brennan Center’s Liberty & National Security Program. // Just Security

• On Thursday, former national security advisor and UN ambassador Susan Rice joins the Brennan Center in New York City to discuss her new memoir, Tough Love: My Story of the Things Worth Fighting For, with NBC’s Andrea Mitchell. // RSVP

• Michael German’s new book, Disrupt, Discredit, and Divide: How the New FBI Damages Democracy, reviewed // New York Times
• Rachel Levinson-Waldman on the problems with using Google Translate to vet social media posts by refugees // ProPublica
• Peter Miller on the role of public comments in redistricting reform // The Fulcrum
• Lawrence Norden on the funding needs for election security ahead of the 2020 elections // New York Times