Good points, and I agree that the federal court judges are not meant to represent the electorate for their jurisdiction, they're appointed by the President.
I did just find this article stating the 9th isn't as "nutty" as it once was ->
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/02/07/how-liberal-reputation-of-9th-circuit-court-of-appeals-is-overblown-scholars-say/And I found another talking about how Arizona wants to leave the 9th district, likely because they're super conservative. ->
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/02/a-circuit-split/435567/Unfortunately for Arizona and as you say...the court doesn't need to represent the will of their people, only the will of the Constitution.
To the OP...the checks and balances going on right now are good, they aren't being abused. Trump needs to slow the fuck down and make decisions within the bounds of fact-based logic and law. That's how this country works. If he continues to fight it he'll continue to get opposed. We're seeing the system working. (And I'm not saying that because Trump isn't getting his way, I agree with some of his ideas.)
,,,,
It wouldn't bother me one bit if the 9th was slashed, disbanded or whatever. There's really nothing that says an area that's liberal gets a liberal FEDERAL court, or that's conservative gets a conservative one. By contrast, judges appointed or elected at the state level often do reflect these biases.
Just remember that when we say "checks and balances," it may be that very pendulum of checks and balances you see swinging toward the 9th.
Lol...
As for Trump slowing down, my opinion is that they'll oppose him no matter what speed he moves at, whatever he does, because that's what they DO. They are "the other side."