In what way does lifetime tenure for justices promote impartiality, according to Hamilton's perspective?

Lifetime tenure for justices promotes impartiality by allowing them to make long-term decisions without the burden of political pressure. According to Hamilton, judges who serve for life are insulated from the immediate whims of public opinion and fleeting political interests. This insulation enables them to uphold the rule of law and interpret the Constitution based solely on legal principles rather than on the need to secure re-election or cater to the preferences of political parties or current public sentiments. This consistent and stable jurisprudence contributes to a more impartial legal system, as justices can focus on what they believe is right under the law rather than what might be popular or politically advantageous at any given time.

In contrast, other options present concepts that undermine the essence of impartiality: running for re-election might pressure justices to sway their decisions towards popular opinion, increasing public accountability may inadvertently lead to decisions made with political considerations, and while enhancing judicial independence from external influences is a part of the rationale, the direct link to decision-making without political interference is more clearly illustrated through the lifetime tenure aspect.