Please correct me if I'm wrong, but

[no_hypocrisy]

if a court decides that an Executive Order is unconstitutional, then the policy can't be executed because that authority solely belongs to Congress. And if Congress doesn't act on the contents of the Executive Order, it can't be interpreted as deferring or delegating to the Executive Branch to act as its proxy.

Did I miss anything?

[hlthe2b]

1. Should be correct. Trump & MAGA will continue to deny or find loopholes, but...

[bucolic_frolic]

2. Yes. SCOTUS has no idea what to do about this, if they're even aware of it.

Congress is not cooperating either, being in GOP control. Obama and Biden issued many EO's. But they weren't demolition derby level.

GWB issued EO's.

I'm not sure Clinton used them, I don't recall. I do recall mild uproar when he used "signing statements", directing how bills he signed into law were to be enforced.

Do they still use "signing statements"? When did they fade? Just not mentioned anymore, or why make a statement when you can EO!!!

[usonian]

3. Laws are only "suggestions" until they are ENFORCED.

You know what's needed?