[Jim Noble]

The Constitution does not need to be amended, via an Article V convention or otherwise, in order to solve the Supreme Court problem, since the written Constitution already contains the solution.

Article III, §2: “...In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.”

[nathanbedford]

You are quite right, Congress has the power to bring the Supreme Court and inferior courts to heel simply by withdrawing jurisdiction. The fact that this remedy has seldom if ever been resorted to by Congress tells us why we have submitted to a kind of judicial oligarchy. This constitutionally afforded remedy as not been invoked partly because Congress wants to be relieved of the responsibility to make these decisions. The left knows that it will win most of the issues and the right knows that it will have something to complain about at election time.

That is why I favor a solution with two components: first, it must be a solution fully capable of being invoked outside of Washington; second, it should be self effectuating, in other words, some sort of binary action must occur, some entity or other must review the Supreme Court's decision up or down. If it is Congress, blustering politicians would at least be compelled to cast actual votes on the record which is of some marginal value. If it is a review by states requiring, for example, 3/5 to overturn a Supreme Court ruling, it would take the matter out of Washington. But will the state be compelled to vote? Would Congress?

How much value there would be in such a constitutional amendment merely by compelling justices to look over their shoulders is difficult to know in advance. We are seeking structural remedies that cannot easily be evaded by a political class which has made evasion an art form. Yet, history has emphatically taught us that seeking remedies at the ballot box under the existing system will simply avail nothing. Seeking more of the same over and over is not working. If we could energize the electorate to discipline congressmen who fail to control federal court jurisdiction we would not need such an amendment but we simply can't.