A century of a growing administrative state and sweeping anti-democratic social changes that have no basis in the constitution is pretty impactful.
> Further: zero is the number of Republicans that would accept the constitutionality of the argument you're making were the roles reversed.
Maybe, but the roles are rarely reversed because they’re not nearly as creative in their legal positions. Even here—imagine what more you could justify by looking at the “penumbras” and “emanations” of that clause of Article II! (Or the second amendment, or the tenth amendment, etc.) Just imagine a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court that all approached the constitutional text the way Breyer did.
> This whole thread of argument you're making is, and this is saying something, distinctively hard to assume good faith about.
I’ve thought direct election of the President (and Senators) was stupid ever since 1L constitutional law. The GOP is just finally coming around.