No, you’re wrong. While the method are enumerated, the actual practice is an instantiated power.
In both instances, the President seeks to game the Constitution through administrative trickery to cut out the legislative advice and consent and ability to over ride vetos <— that’s not enumerated in the Constitution, it is however instantiated as a consequence of it’s enumeration. So it’s perfectly Constitutional for the President to exploit this.
But don’t take my word for it. I’ll let the SCOTUS address it as they did in:
Pocket Veto Case - 279 U.S. 655 (1929)
The Constitution specifically allows the pocket veto.
The Constitution only allows Congress to COUNT - you know, like one, two, three - the electoral votes. The Constitution does not allow Congress to throw out votes. The statute specifically states that they have NO DISCRETION to throw out votes that are properly certified by the States.
Night and day difference. If they would throw out properly-certified electoral votes because they claimed that Obama is ineligible they would be breaking the law and overstepping what the Constitution authorizes them to do. Totally different than the pocket veto.