Maybe I should word the question: Is the Supreme Court consistent with the ideas of the founding fathers?
The role of the US-SC is to decide the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress and the States (primarily). If all decisions rendered by the court came out 9-0 then we might expect that the mandate of the court was clear cut. On the other hand, if the justices voted as if each tossed a coin for every decision then their function would be more harmful than anything else.
Shortly after Sandra Day OConnor retired, I took all the decisions rendered by each justice over a period of several years. I assigned a 1 to a yes vote (concur) and a 0 to a no vote. I then had 9 time series, one for each justice, consisting of a sequence of 1s and 0s.
I calculated the covariance matrix of these 9 time series and the eigenvectors/eigenvalues of the matrix. By looking at the eigenvalues I can determine the effective number of justices on the court. If a single eigenvalue represented all the variance, then the court would be voting as a single mind. On the other hand, if the nine eigenvalues were roughly equal then that would mean no coherence to the voting.
It turned out that just a little over 2 eigenvalues accounted for almost all of the variance. I think that means that philosophical differences account for the decisions. It may not be partisanship, but it certainly represents factionalism.
The Founding Fathers wanted to avoid factionalism.