Checks and balances should not be played with on partisan issues. Such a debatable use of article III sec. 2. to overule Supreme Court precedent rulings on not one, not two, but three cases, is a violation of the principle of checks and balance, by twisting the letter of a law out of context. Remember, what you try to do here will then become a precedent itself, consistently, and irresponsibly, misused whenever there are majority parties on both sides in the future. It will be a nuclear option, so to speak, for partisanship that indelibly erodes the separation of powers our constitution sought to establish.