Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."
NOTE: enforcing via appropriate legislation means delegation of Congressional power.
First, the 14th empowers Congress to "enforce by appropriate legislation the provisions of" the 14th Amendment. Enforcing by legislation must mean, to you, that Congress can control anything and everything that seems expedient by issuing laws, is that it? Since you've established that, cite the section in the 14th which mentions delegation of legislative powers to the judiciary and the executive. I know that it doesn't exist, but every liberal judge who has legislated from the bench has found his authority somewhere in that amendment as you have. I guess the 14th means whatever anyone dissatisfied with our form of government wants it to mean. Only someone skilled in interpreting English into Martian could claim that "enforcing by legislation" means "delegating Congressional power". Have another drink.
Second, you're trotting out FDR's favorite justification for having Congress do anything convenient. Now, are domestic airlines foreign nations, states or indian tribes? No, not the last time I checked. The commerce clause doesn't state "Congress may dictate anything that pops into the head of any member of the legislative branch just so long as it can be shown that someone somewhere may be assumed to cross a state line in doing his business". Until the Constitution is amended to read in the way I described, then Congress may regulate the way state governments interact in legislating business done by citizens of other states with citizens of their state. That's as far as it can be stretched for interstate commerce. Remember, the Constitution isn't binding on citizens, only on governments.
Third, you've discovered a bizarre empowerment for Congress to act on "whim". I suppose then that anything a majority of politicians want to do is fine. You've taken a turn into delusion now. Congress most certainly may not create courts by whim. Those courts are not empowered by Congress, but by Article III, once they are established. Congress only creates them, it can't give them any power not delegated to the judiciary by the Constitution. I think you're confusing the US Congress with the Politburo of red China.
You're stretching quite a bit to conclude that because the President may delegate warmaking powers to his generals, then he may hand them over to federal courts or to Congress. Give me the cite for that "discovery" of yours. Also give the cite for this imaginary power you're claiming for Congress to abolish the entire judiciary system except the SCOTUS. That one is a huge leap of logic, if the word logic even applies. You've failed utterly to cite anything in any article which even mentions the word "delegate" in regard to powers of one branch being transferred to another. Hint: you'll never find that justification, because the doctrine of separation of powers would be nullified by it. Wait for an amendment.
Keep trying, and one day the design of the Constitution just might become clear to you. You'll have to stop this habit of translating English into Martian, though.