No. Judges would only play political games if they could run for re-election. Make it simple - one term (10 years?) then you're out of the game forever.
And ... yeah, in many MANY ways we'd be better off w/out Marbury v. Madison... but ultimately I think it's necessary (to prevent a runaway legislature)... and the historical record suggests that the framers overwhelmingly approved of judicial review...
Yes, which is why I didn't add it but specifically stated that Congress could overturn an obvious misrule (e.g. Pledge of Allegiance comes to mind). By making it take two sessions (which some states do for amendments to their Constitution) makes it hard enough to do that it just wouldn't be an example of Congressional pique at being overruled.