A judge concerned for his job might not be inclined to issue rulings against states. That is bad policy that promotes false justice. The federal courts, particularly the lower courts, are amazingly good and, by and large, stocked with shockingly competent judges.
The current Article III system is the best. It does not need changing. If one is insistent in making judges accountable to the electorate (which is absurd) a better system is one in which judges are appointed with advice and consent and then subject to a periodic retention vote, like say every ten or twenty years.
i could live with that, but for the record, I meant a super majority of states.