It’s hardly an independent body when 67% of members are lifetime political appointees from a party that hasn’t represented a national majority in several decades.
You can't really make that claim, objectively.
US elections aren't decided by national majority, so you can't use them as a measure of national majority.
If the game was different, people would play it differently.
For example, Amy Barrett was confirmed by a vote of 55-43, including 3 Democrats.
I'm not sure why you mention "a national majority". It was never a popularity contest. States elect senators, senators confirm Supreme Court justices.
The voters elect senators, who nominate candidates and then vote.
The senate judiciary committee will vote, then the candidate is voted on by the entire senate.
Regardless, the confirmation process is conducted by elected representatives. There is no "this party chose them".
Which has happened quite often?
Now, it causes a political circus.
In fact, the more we demand that it match that profile, the less independent it’s likely to become.