How about 2-thirds of a majority in the house so that these laws are less likely to make it to the SCOTUS in the first place?
You seem to be missing the point that the determination of “the job” as you describe it is the essence of politics. Who decides what “the job” is? Is it to provide universal health care, or is it to minimize government intrusion? Is it maximize fairness or freedom? What you are saying is very easy in the abstract. The reality is something different.
The Supreme Court has always been polarized. The difference now is that the court is content to have 5-4 decisions on divisive issues on a regular basis. Before Rhenquist, that wasn’t true. It’s unfortunate that Roberts has continued that.
Are people seeing some connection between voting in legislatures and voting in judicial panels that I’m not aware of?