Final answer:
Life appointments of Supreme Court judges are designed to protect them from political partisanship, allowing them to focus on the law without concern for re-election, though they are still influenced by their individual beliefs and the media in controversial cases.
Step-by-step explanation:
The life appointments of Supreme Court judges do indeed affect the way the Court works. By design, these appointments are meant to insulate justices from the pressure of public opinion, political swings, and partisan politics. This affords justices the freedom to interpret the law without concern for re-election or political repercussions, theoretically allowing them to focus on the long-term impacts and constitutional principles.
However, it is important to note that justices do not operate in a vacuum. Studies suggest a complex relationship between public opinion, judicial decisions, and Supreme Court functioning. Justices, while not directly influenced by the ebbs and flows of political trends in the short term, are still individuals with personal beliefs that may align more with the political leanings of the presidents who appointed them.
Furthermore, when the Court takes on controversial cases, the media spotlight can raise public awareness and indirectly influence the court through heightened discourse, though the extent to which this impacts decisions is debatable. The lack of a direct enforcement mechanism for Supreme Court rulings and the checks and balances within the government also mean that the effectiveness and reception of judicial opinions can vary.
Ultimately, life appointments serve to give the Supreme Court a certain degree of stability and consistency, enabling justices to adjudicate with a degree of independence from transient political forces.