There was an argument about noncompetes and the FTC in front of a Federal judge recently.

The judge said, "Even as the agency has the power, I don't feel sufficiently convinced by their argument and will block it anyway."

That doesn't sound like they have as much power in their delegated responsibilities if an arbitrary judge says "... and you also have to convince me personally, even though you're entitled to do it."

if Congress wanted to delegate decision making to the judicial branch they can pass laws that do so. they pass a law saying that the agency can make decisions, those decisions should be respected. this decision is right the equivalent of if the courts decided they had the power to block laws that the court thought were bad policy

You should read about the non-delegation principle and why it exists. As Wikipedia says, “It is explicit or implicit in all written constitutions that impose a strict structural separation of powers. It is usually applied in questions of constitutionally improper delegations of powers of any of the three branches of government to either of the other, to the administrative state, or to private entities.”

What you are proposing is that Congress be allowed to abolish its own power, completely destroying the constitution.

> What you are proposing is that Congress be allowed to abolish its own power, completely destroying the constitution.

Who cares if they had that ability? They wouldn't use it.

And even if they did, it wouldn't violate separation of powers.

And even if they did, they could make a new law that takes it back.

Of all the worries about delegation, this one seems like the least meaningful.