Alexander Hamilton describes his vision for the judiciary in Federalist Paper #78. In it, he argues that judges should serve their lifetime appointments contingent on their "good behavior." Hamilton felt that, once appointed, Judges should be free to hear cases, deliberate, and make rulings free from the influence of the legislature and other political matters. Furthermore, this "permanent tenure" will ensure the independence of the judiciary and allow them to focus on the "the faithful performance of so arduous a duty." In other words, if judges serve for life, they won't have to get involved in the distracting and corrupting politics that the rest of the government is subject to. Consequently, they can work to stay true to the meaning of the Constitution.

As to the selection of members of the judiciary, Hamilton argues in Federalist Paper #76 and #77 that the President can appoint them with the consent of the Senate. He contends that this is a good system because the "true test of a good government is its aptitude and tendency to produce a good administration." That is a way of saying that, if they build a strong and wholesome government, it will be able to produce a judiciary to match.

Implicit in all this is the type of judicial selection that Hamilton does not want. The other option would be to elect members of the judiciary. While many of the anti-federalists supported this approach, Hamilton saw it as dangerous. First of all, he felt that judicial elections have the power to introduce more corruption into the system. He also was concerned with the "tyranny of the majority." Removing the selection of judges from the direct democratic process and having them serve for life will ensure their independence from whatever is the largest faction in politics at a given time.

Today, while many states do elect their judges, the federal judiciary operates along the lines that Hamilton advocated.