If judges are in fact "immune to political pressure" then that's merely one less facet of the government that the public has any kind of oversight on. It's not

If judges are in fact "immune to political pressure" then that's merely one less facet of the government that the public has any kind of oversight on. It's not really debatable that the current court is heavily pro-corporation/government power, though some blips against this trend can be observed, as you pointed out. In terms of sources: http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/elizabeth-warren-warns-corporate-capt http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/elizabeth-warren-warn... ; the quoted remarks by Senator Warren indicate that judicial nominees are actually not easily confirmed, and are sometimes already "captured" by corporate interest. It's very feasible that lobbyists could lobby the legislature in order to promote confirmation of judicial candidates who fit their agenda. Aside from lobbying the legislature to affect the judiciary's appointments, the judiciary can also be directly bought and sold: http://jonathanturley.org/2013/06/02/its-all-about-the-judges/ http://jonathanturley.org/2013/06/02/its-all-about-the-judge... ; most relevantly: “According to a recent investigation by the Center for Public Integrity, “conservative foundations, multinational oil companies and a prescription drug maker were the most frequent sponsors of more than 100 expense-paid educational seminars attended by federal judges over a 4 1/2-year period.” About 185 federal judges participated in these “educational” events which were sponsored by multinational corporations such as ExxonMobil, Pfizer and BP." I do not accept that the corruption that I outlined is a "conspiracy theory"-- it is a well-documented reality.