Q1
The court system is not swayed by political winds or partisan infighting. So, they would be able to protect the rights of minority groups or individuals. For example, Justice Anthony Kennedy, appointed by Republican President Reagan, became a swing vote and sometimes siding with the more conservative justice, but at other times not. Also, Justice John Roberts has twice voted to uphold provisions of the Affordable Care Act.
Q2
Although judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate rather than being elected by popular vote. This arrangement, as mentioned in Question 1, is designed to ensure that judges would be able to protect the rights of minority groups. If judges are elected by popular vote, they will naturally protect only the interests of the majority and ignore the minority
You made a good point about why judges are appointed instead of elected. Your examples of Justices Anthony Kennedy and John Roberts show that judges can make decisions independently, even if people expect them to rule a certain way based on who appointed them. I also like how you explained that the purpose of the system is to protect constitutional rights rather than simply follow public opinion. Your response clearly explains why the judicial branch was designed differently from the legislative and executive branches.