"It is vital because the framers believed that a republic— a thing of the people—would be more likely to enact just laws than a regime administered by a ruling class of largely unaccountable “ministers.” " -Gorsuch
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf (Page 40)
"Admittedly, lawmaking under our Constitution can be difficult. But that is nothing particular to our time nor any accident. The framers believed that the power to make new laws regulating private conduct was a grave one that could, if not properly checked, pose a serious threat to individual liberty. See The Federalist No. 48, at 309–312 (J. Madison); see also id., No. 73, at 441–442 (A. Hamilton). As a result, the framers deliberately sought to make lawmaking difficult by insisting that two houses of Congress must agree to any new law and the President must concur or a legislative supermajority must override his veto." -Gorsuch
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf (Page 42)
Not a lawyer either, but Gorsuch seems to argue that agencies should not have the ability to legislate anything that has significant economic or political impact. It's probably a stretch to say all power will return to the legislature, but it will likely make CDC vaccine mandate type legislation impossible without proper congressional approval.
Anything that is punished by financial or imprisonments must be a laws passed by congress.
This also ends agency capture I think.