If you are suggesting that justice and security can arise from executive orders being tested in court on the basis of efficacy alone, rather than being attribut

If you are suggesting that justice and security can arise from executive orders being tested in court on the basis of efficacy alone, rather than being attributable to a specific enumerated power, then I view this as a very naive and privileged view. If the "necessary and proper" clause subsumes the entire limitation on power in Washington DC, it is the most disadvantaged in society who will suffer for it. No matter how good a decision Congress or POTUS might want to make, I prefer that they be strictly restrained. The idea of "the united States of America" as the default political unit (rather than more localized decision-making) is a relic of an age without the kind of communication technology we have today. I am especially cautious at agencies like CDC, which have blundered their way through some important decision-making, being given expanded powers at a time when more local agencies are capable of consuming precisely the same wealth of information.