Are we ignoring the fact that congress didn't need to fix this for the last 45 years, because the judiciary had set clear precedent on how it interpreted the la

Are we ignoring the fact that congress didn't need to fix this for the last 45 years, because the judiciary had set clear precedent on how it interpreted the law? Why would congress spend its time on bolstering the defenses of well-established laws against every potential random flip-flopping of the judiciary at any point in the future? That sounds like a tremendous waste of time, and an exercise in trying to mind-read future judges. What's really happening here is that a wall that took years/decades to build, that everyone thought was solid, was just torn down, and everyone is saying "the masons should have just built a better wall if they cared so much. They can do so now if they choose." while the territory that the wall was protecting is being invaded. See the problem?