Anonymous wrote:The line between legislation, execution, and adjudication is as clear as separating red, green, and blue.

Implementing regulations. Use of legislative history and debate in interpretation of statutes. Questions of private right of action. It's not obviously so clear.

And it's certainly not an inherently necessary or obviously preferable split. Why not have the legislature responsible for the interpretation of laws? - they wrote them. Ditto for executing them. In most parliamentary systems, the executive is essentially a branch of the legislature.

Anonymous wrote:Marbury vs. Madison may have contained a challenge but it was unsuccessful.

Some have seen it differently, as a successful and inappropriate expansion of the Court's powers. If it were as easy a call as you present it, it probably wouldn't be very well known.

We could have a constitutional amendment providing for the line-item veto. Then it would be constitutional and it would be there for all presidents, regardless of party.