[thebradbain]

To get pedantic, the executive is there to enforce (and decide how to enforce) the law.

The judicial is there to decide if a given law should be enforced (and if a given enforcement method is valid)

This is why I’m not a big fan of originalism: that is almost always a subjective decision.

Otherwise we would just have a legislative and an executive.

[salawat]

Nitpick: >To get pedantic, the executive is there to enforce (and decide how to enforce) the law.

The Executive is there to implement an enforcement mechanism, even if the decision os to implement a null mechanism.

The executive cannot (or normatively should not ex nihilo) just materialize enforcement infrastructure without Congressional approval. The existence of Administrative law, however, rather shopts down the original intent of the Founders in terms of Governmental architecture.