There are many difficult problems that stem from the Nadon decision itself, and they are conceptual problems.
With the greatest of respect, I do not personally agree with the Nadon decision. Frankly, it is a decision that had a certain moment in time, but it does not look at the long-term policies necessary to build on the constitutional requirements of what we need for a sane and proper Supreme Court or other tribunal.
I think that anything that amends Nadon, that ameliorates that, that recognizes there is a broad diversity of jurists who may be able to work within the system and does not become bound to what, by this time, is an ancient understanding.... Probably, if we asked the people who were concerned 100 years ago, they would say that was not what they ever intended.