2. judges – unlike Presidents, Mayors and members of Congress (and other legislatures), they are not elected, but rather appointed. Many Americans have thus called the federal courts system, and especially the Supreme Court, anti-democratic places in our government. Do you agree that the Supreme Court, for example, is an anti-democratic part of our government? What could be the reason for this way of choosing judges in federal courts? (HINT: think about our discussion of “Federalist #10”, and which social class plays a leading role in our government system.)

Some have claimed that the Supreme Court is ‘undemocratic’ because it has judges, not presidents, as its decision-makers. However, such a structure is put in place to safeguard the rights of individuals and ensure that there is continuity in legalities than to bend to the wishes of the majority. In Federalist rationing number ten Madison explained how boisterous majorities or what he termed factions could enact legislation that would oppress the minority. With this in mind, the framers aimed at creating an independent judiciary that would be a balance to political might and a guardian of the constitution no matter how much the public opinion was against it. The purpose of appointing rather than electing the judges is to ensure that the decisions to be made are based on the law and the constitution and not on political gains or the current trends. This in turns helps in preventing the judiciary from being an arm of the majority or of the political opponents, and frees it to concentrate on the business of interpreting and applying the constitution and the laws and protecting the rights of individuals including members of minority communities. Although this system reduces the level of direct democratic influence, it is in harmony with the objectives of the framers of the constitution to create a system of balanced government where the judicial arm has the role of being the stabilizer different from the political arms. It also depicts the fact that elites who are those in possession of wealth and power, have played a critical role in the formation of the political and legal systems. In this sense, the Court can be viewed as an organization that responds to the needs of this part of society, which, from time to time, may be in contrast with what the rest of the population wants. But the judiciary’s independence is supposed to prevent the application of justice according to the trends of political developments so as to balance the other arms of government from possible abuses of power.