Basically, look at this, especially the part that reads:
"...1928 case in which the Court, speaking through Chief Justice Taft, upheld congressional delegation to the President of the authority to set tariff rates that would equalize production costs in the United States and competing countries."Setting tariff rates is specifically granted to Congress in the Constitution ("Duties, Imposts and Excises"), yet it is allowed to be delegated to the President.
The clause granting the power of tariff to Congress is only a couple above the commerce clause. The other two items in the commerce clause besides foreign governments (states and indians) have been delegated already to some extent in the form of the Interstate Commerce Commission (now Department of Transportation) and the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Q, That is exactly why the idea of 9 politically appointed bureaucrats sitting on the supreme court should NOT be allowed to "interpret" the words of the Constitution to fit their particular whims at any given time in history. Taft, and his coherts should have been impeached by Congress THEN!! It would have at least awakened people {including judges} of the dangers involved in allowing the current Supreme Court to make such un-Constitutional rulings. Because, now there is "case law" {not law at all, but the opinion of those 9 justices serving at the point in time the ruling was made}. So, we now have judges rulings having the color and force {that's guns} of law without legitimacy {unconstitutional}. Should that be allowed? Suppose 5 of those nine happen to be pure evil, at any given time, or can be persuaded to evil easily in order to not "appear" to be "patriotic" in the current philosophy of the day. This is NOT good. Peace and love, George.