Originally Posted by
henra
They are initially nominated by the President. Once appointed they are completely untouchable by the Government (also all subsequent ones). Their decisions can't bring them benefits or disadvantages for their further career. That alone makes them independent. In contrast to this in Countries like China (or Russia) a decision any time can end the career of high judges. That is a significant difference.
The nominees are only able to be appointed with the Advice and Consent of Senate; that is per the Constitution. A nominee can be rejected. (Robert Bork being one case in recent memory). The same is true for the major Cabinet officers. We are getting off topic here.
@fdr I am reminded of the never ending shenanigans between the Greeks and the Turks as regards which rock/island in the eastern med is whose and thus where one measures territorial waters from.