[CharlesWayneCT]

First, that would be put on a law, not an amendment.

Second, an activist judge would simply say that congress cannot legislate the jurisdiction of the supreme court to decide the constitutionality of the legislation because that would violate separation of powers.

If the court is interpreting the law and the constitution, they can say anything means anything they want.

Change the court, not the constitution.

[CA Conservative]

Second, an activist judge would simply say that congress cannot legislate the jurisdiction of the supreme court to decide the constitutionality of the legislation because that would violate separation of powers.

Actually, you are wrong here. This has been used before, and the Supreme Court agreed that they had no ability to review a law that Congress (and the President) specifically shielded from such review.

Our Constitutional expert-in-residence, the honorable Congressman BillyBob, can probably give you the relevant case(s).