That would require an amendment to the USC.
If we’re going to amend the Constitution, we may as well spell out exactly what we want.
Not that it is a bad idea, but if we go that route, there is an even simpler route: Congress has the power to create and close any courts it wants and to spell out very specifically what kinds of cases the courts can and cannot take. If we had a contitutionalist congress, they could end this crap quickly. This is the remedy Phyllis Schlafly spelled out in The Supremacists.
Bork’s remedy was to implement “legislative loopback.” This would create a provision such that, whenever the USSC ruled on a case that would set precedent (esp. that which could “legislate from the bench”), the Congress had a time period during which they could draft and pass a law rectifying the USSC’s decision so that the will of the people could be represented by their representatives and not be “ruled over” by a handful of black-robed tyrants.