> The attorney general and/or office of the president can now unilaterally decide that something grossly unconstitutional (e.g., eliminating birthright citizenship) is actually "legal" and instruct all federal employees to enact it on that basis. We then have to wait for courts to intervene, possibly for it to reach the supreme court, which could take a long time.

If the president ordered something actually grossly unconstitutional (and reversing Wong Kim Ark, a decision that the Supreme Court itself was split on, is hardly a good example of that), it would be the senate's duty to impeach.

The legal system is indeed overly slow to come down on federal agencies that do the wrong thing. If your side is onboard with improving that, that's all to the good.

> Whereas before, the interpretation of the law would have been distributed across all the agencies, making it much harder to turn them toward nefarious ends.

Unaccountability cuts both ways. Yes, if each agency is doing its own interpretation of the law, that makes it harder for elected officials to control what those agencies do. I don't see that as a good thing.