The Presidency and the Supreme Court -- Why aren't things easier?

OK, we are close to wrapping up our study of the U.S. Supreme Court. Soon we will be moving on to Congress -- that should be fun! But, one last point related to the Supreme Court concerns the mantra we all sing in the States about checks and balances. So...what's a presidential check on the Supreme Court, says American teacher to English students? The correct response, offered by several concientious students, is the President's ability to appoint judges that share his political ideology, thereby reshaping the direction of the court's decisions. (See, for example, President Bush's appointment of the moderate-to-conservative John Roberts as Chief Justice and the quite conservative Samuel Alito as associate justice.) So far, so good.

Then we come to the Nixon Watergate tapes case, where Chief Justice Warren Burger, nominated by Nixon, writes the opinion for the Court AGAINST Nixon, essentially ending any hope on Nixon's part of avoiding resignation or impeachment. And, if that weren't enough, there's the famous quote by President Eisenhower, commenting on HIS appointment of Earl Warren as Chief Justice: "the biggest damn fool mistake I ever made." So, the bottom line for my English students: yes, presidents can TRY to reshape the Court but, as with so many other aspects of history, things don't always turn out the way political leaders expect.