It’s vague---the CP specifies what the court is threatened over, the perm doesn’t. The perm solves less---only legislating over a specific policy tips the balance of power towards congress.

Sarah Herman Peck; 2018; Congress’s Power over Courts: Jurisdiction Stripping and the Rule of Klein; Congressional Research Service;

Article III of the Constitution establishes the judicial branch of the federal government.1 Notably, it empowers federal courts to hear “cases” and “controversies.” 2 Additionally, the Constitution creates a federal judiciary with significant independence, providing federal judges with life tenure and prohibiting diminutions of judges’ salaries.3 In presiding over cases and controversies, federal courts possess significant power over the citizenry’s life, liberty, and property, 4 and that power can be exercised in a manner that could be in tension with the interests of the legislative branch. One way Congress potentially can temper the judiciary’s influence is by regulating federal court jurisdiction. The Exceptions Clause in Article III grants Congress the power to make “exceptions” and “regulations” to the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction.5 And more generally, with the power to create lower federal courts, Congress possesses the power to eliminate the jurisdiction of the lower courts.6 Congress sometimes exercises this power by “stripping” federal courts of jurisdiction to hear a class of cases. Indeed, Congress has even eliminated a court’s jurisdiction to review a particular case in the midst of litigation.7 More generally, Congress may influence judicial outcomes by amending the substantive law underlying particular litigation of interest to the legislature.8

These practices have, at times, raised separation-of-powers concerns about whether the legislative branch is impermissibly interfering with the judicial power to resolve cases and controversies independently. Long ago in Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court announced that the Constitution, by granting the judicial branch the power to decide “cases” and “controversies,” necessarily grants the judiciary the power to “say what the law is.” Sometimes butting up against this principle is the understanding that “Congress has the power (within limits) to tell the courts what classes of cases they may decide,” as well as to enact legislation that may have an effect on pending cases being adjudicated by the federal courts. But the limits of Congress’s power to legislate may be tested when Congress enacts measures that target individualized concerns and small subsets of individuals, as opposed to legislating for the country as a whole and the general welfare.