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.
Actually, why don't you explain how Congress can "enforce by legislation" if not a single Power can be delegated to anyone outside of members of Congress (your warped view, not mine).
On the contrary, it is no "stretch". The Constitution places the entire military under the civilian command of the President, with no limitations on that command. Thus, if the President wants a general or a Joint Chiefs of Staff to be in command of an operation, then that is the way it will be. If the President wants a civilian defense contractor to manage comlex equipment during a battle, then that's the way it will be because ALL aspects of our military are subordinate to the President's wishes. Likewise, the President can place judges in charge of certain operations, as happened at Nuremberg after WW2.
On the contrary, Congress has the express right to create an unlimited number of courts (see Article III, Section 1). Further, Congress can grant said courts any and all legislatively-derived powers legally created by Congress (via signed bills) or deemed as a Judiciary Power by the Constitution in the first place.
Again, you show that you are misinterpreting and misapplying the 10th Amendment. You are trying to believe that since the 10th Amendment limits the overall scope of Power of "government", that it prevents the delegation of Power between the three branches of government. That is simply not true. Delegation is not forbidden. In fact, delegation of power is incumbant upon enforcing legislation.
Your bizarre, twisted, and visibly DISPROVEN interpretation of the 10th Amendment would hold that the FAA was unConstitutional. Your view would laughably hold that Congress did not have the authority to delegate its Power to the Post Office to issue and verify stamps, but that members of Congress must issue and verify stamps.
You are guilty of trying to re-interpret the Constitution to fit your own personal version of what our government should look like. You are trying to manipulate the facts to fit your own pre-determined conclusion. It won't work.
Congress CAN delegate power. The President CAN delegate power. Courts even delegate power when they release a prisoner under the supervision of another person.
So repeat after me until it finally soaks into your skull: "Power can be legally delegated".