1. I think the court system is better at protecting individuals because it’s not influenced by politics or public opinion the way elected branches are. Judges don’t have to worry about getting re-elected or making popular decisions, so they can focus on what’s fair and what the Constitution actually says. A good example is Brown v. Board of Education. Even though a lot of people back then still supported segregation, the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional. That decision helped protect the rights of African American students even when most politicians didn’t want to touch the issue. It shows how the courts can stand up for people’s rights when the majority or the government won’t.

2. Federal judges are appointed instead of elected, which makes some people think the system is anti democratic. But the point of that setup is to make sure judges can make decisions without being pressured by voters or politicians. If judges had to campaign like presidents or members of Congress they’d probably start making decisions to please people instead of doing what’s right under the law. In Federalist No. 10, Madison talked about the dangers of majority rule, and this is kind of connected to that. The courts are supposed to protect people’s rights even when the majority disagrees. So while it might seem undemocratic, it’s actually meant to keep our government balanced and fair.