[wat10000]

My point is that the one enables the other. Congress gave the President tremendous power under the assumption that the President would use it wisely. Lots of people said, "but what if one day the President is a shithead?" They were ignored. Now the President is a shithead, and surprise surprise, all this power that was ripe for abuse is being abused.

This isn't whataboutism. It's pointing out why you don't give individuals huge amounts of power and hope they're cool.

[jeffbee]

It is. Your point is a non-point. Delegating tariff powers did not lead to the President kidnapping and selling lawful residents of America.

Delegating tariff authority to the executive: an arguably constitutional thing that Congress did deliberately and with due caution, which courts have gone along with.

Rendering lawful residents from U.S. soil to slave camps in foreign nations: no basis in statute or jurisprudence.

[wat10000]

Of course not. Delegating tariff powers led to the President enacting a bunch of stupid tariffs.

Delegating immigration rules is what led to the immigration abuses.

If Congress had refrained from delegating so much power to the executive, this particular executive would not be able to do so much terrible stuff. This is exactly why a lot of people said that it was a bad idea to do that, but Congress was content to assume that the President would wield this power wisely.