This thinking brings us to the second principle where it will become more apparent why being a justice is not as simple as persevering with the best intentions. Justices are Strategic It is well known that the reason justices do not serve elected terms, but are appointed for life, is so that they are free to make decisions as they see fit and not decisions that will get them re-elected. This distinction is what separates them from being the same as any common Congressman, who votes to appease his constituents. Unfortunatly, life is never that simple. Epstein and Knight make no premise that Judges are these highly idealistic people who always vote stricly with their firmest beliefs.
Judges are some of the best strategists, by trade.
Before the Court can even enter deliberation they must first deliberate on whether to do so or not. If the Court decides to not hear a case, but a Justice feels strongly that the case needs to be heard he may file a dissention paper. The paper includes reasons as to why he feels it is an important case. The main reason why justices will change their mind is when it seems that the case will have more impact, or is a large Circuit discrepancy than originally assumed or noted. The justices then review this and have another vote.