In theory, yes. Any supreme court interpretation can be overruled by a congress that is truly in lockstep.

Reality, is disappointing. Where we have a dealocked congress we try to switch around every 2 years while 9 people in the courts can re-interpret how they wish with basically zero reprecussions, for life.

Maybe the SCOTUS also needs terms limits thanks to modern medical advances. I don't think the founding fathers intended for courts to remain the same people for decades on end. It can be a very long term like the Federal Reserve, but we definitely need something.

▲

rnxrx 3 hours ago | parent [-]

How about we just start with SCOTUS having transparent (and enforced) ethics and corruption policies?

	▲	johnnyanmac 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The issue lies in who enforces it. In theory, that's congress with the ability to impeach and convict members of SCOTUS. I've also thrown around ideas in my head of state SC's chief justices having a channel to court marshal a SCOTUS and eject them with a supermajority ruling. Or a band of federal judges. But there's so much more involved there I haven't begun to consider.