Why does the President of the US nominate the Supreme Court Justice's instead of us voting for them?

Answer 1

the founders didn't' trust the populace to make informed decisions about things, and they also did not want the Supreme Court to be a political position. As it is, the Supreme Court is immune to politics while in session so they can make a fair judgment. If politics entered into the equation, the constitution would not be interpreted accurately, but according to political expediency.

Answer 2

I have a bit of a problem with both systems. The president can nominate justices that agree with him, loading the court. But I'm not sure democracy is the solution there either. Because people are already voting for house and senate. I really don't know what the solution would be. I mean how to avoid politicizing the supreme court. One thing would be to have an absolute condition that a prospective justice has never before taken any political stand - but I'm not sure I like that either. I think there is a need for more checks to the president's power to name justices. It could go like this: the pres would propose a justice, he would have to be approved by senate, but before that, he would have to be checked out by a lower court, to make sure he will be politically neutral in his decisions. Even then there will be ways around it. Impossible to have a perfect system with imperfect people.

Answer 3

This is a process set down in the constitution.

The reasons are best summed up this way: justice, and equality.

When one is approved to the supreme court by elected officials, rather than being elected themselves, they are not beholden to voters or special interest groups as elected officials are. If they were, you would not be as likely to get an impartial judgement from them. :)