But yes, the current condition of the court is shameful. Presidents appoint justices. Republicans have won the popular vote for president ONCE in the past 32 years. And yet 6 out of 9 justices have been appointed by Republican presidents.
To me, it's always been a good idea to study some ideas - (1) expanding the Court and then selecting randomly a subset to hear any given case (which is the way that the Circuit Courts usually operate) in order to cut down on the importance of any single judge or (2) having term limits so each President gets to have 1 or 2 appointments. Or something else to get out of this morass of the Court zinging one way or the other depending on how many appointments any single President has and the two parties always voting against the other parties' nominees regardless of qualifications and credentials.
I guess I was wrong.
That being said, I'd still like to see court reform. It's a bit absurd that 9 unelected justices are allowed to have so much power with no term limits. Not saying that the justices should be elected (that would be absolute chaos) or that the court should be packed, but it would be nice if there were term limits. I also wish they didn't have the power to strike down entire laws. It just seems so counter-productive to strike down the whole thing when they can just strike down part of it and explain the issues with said law. I'd like to see it more like New Zealand (based on what Jerry928 described above).