Recently, the grand justice selection system has been examined through a biased lens. It may not be true that previous justices were without political leanings. However, since Taiwan’s democratic transformation, the key to whether Taiwan’s jurisprudence will gain the confidence of the people is whether justices, with their life-long positions in the judiciary, can judge cases independently without the influence of the political party they belong to. The issue of transitional justice, which may occur in the process of a democratic transformation, will eventually be submitted to the court for a final ruling. Pursuing transitional justice is a necessary process in order to ensure that the constitutional democratic system is built with human rights, and it is inevitable that the grand justices will be involved in the debate over transitional justice. During a period of democratic transformation, a stable judiciary is even more necessary as a line of defense in order to reconcile constitutional disputes and safeguard the constitutional system. The role of the grand justice, as defined in the Constitution, is that he or she must surmount political orientations after being elected, in order to respect and safeguard the Constitution. Thus, it is now critical for Taiwan’s success or failure in democratic transformation and in guaranteeing judicial independence that the Legislative Yuan abandon the practice of treating the political orientation, the political standpoint, and the profit of political parties as considerations while conducting investigations. On the contrary, as political parties continue to regard political orientation as the most important or the only criterion, it may be difficult to realize judicial independence without any bias.