Absolutely, and let me tout my less-radical-than-it-seems suggestion of what to do about SCOTUS: sortition.
Only the role of the chief justice is constitutionally enshrined. Write a Judiciary Act prescribing that the other seats get filled by a yearly random draw from the courts of appeals.
i mentioned this before but the last week or two has fully clarified that the rest of our lives is a drag-out fight against the supreme court that starts with priming the public to enthusiastically support — or at the very least resist decorum-based media calls against — completely rebuilding it
Make it impossible, in other words, for axe-grinding litigants to know who would hear their union-busting/Black-voter suppressing case du jour — or for the Harlan Crows of the world to know where to send their bribes.
In its early days as an institution, the Supreme Court’s justices used to ride circuit – presiding over cases in assigned states or regions. Sortition would invert this practice — assigning Senate-confirmed judges to one-year stints serving on the nation’s federal court of final appeal.
Because the structure of the Supreme Court isn't defined in constitutional text — only the role of chief justice is — Congress can write language redefining its membership. As this article argues, it departs from legislative precedents to say that change can happen only once all seats fall vacant:
The combination of life tenure for associate justices and Senate partisanship creates a corruptible, effectively immovable set of petty tyrants at the heart of our constitutional structure. As the Roberts court’s attacks on the Constitution show, we must no longer trust the justices with such power.
Again: perhaps it would serve these United States better if its system of government trusted no one, not even jurists possessed of impeccable character, with absolute power.