Yes, it is overly simplistic to say federal agencies implement laws without specifying that it means IF those laws require federal instead of state action. The Constitution does not go into detail about federal level duties in part (I believe) because they intended for the federal government to be small and it's actions minimal.
Article II, Section 2 refers to the executive departments of which Washington had four (War, Justice, State, Treasury). Article I, Section 8 (near the end) grants Congress the authority necessary to make all laws for the execution of their powers vested by the Constitution or "in any Department". With the separation of powers, I think executive agencies that make laws/statues/mandates beyond the scope of laws enacted by Congress are in violation.
I am not an expert in this and could be wrong, that's just my reading of it.
Yes, it is overly simplistic to say federal agencies implement laws without specifying that it means IF those laws require federal instead of state action. The Constitution does not go into detail about federal level duties in part (I believe) because they intended for the federal government to be small and it's actions minimal.
Article II, Section 2 refers to the executive departments of which Washington had four (War, Justice, State, Treasury). Article I, Section 8 (near the end) grants Congress the authority necessary to make all laws for the execution of their powers vested by the Constitution or "in any Department". With the separation of powers, I think executive agencies that make laws/statues/mandates beyond the scope of laws enacted by Congress are in violation.
I am not an expert in this and could be wrong, that's just my reading of it.