The applicable cliche here is "the perfect is the enemy of the good." I may be misreading your point, but the way this reads to me, it's kinda a reductio ad abs

The applicable cliche here is "the perfect is the enemy of the good." I may be misreading your point, but the way this reads to me, it's kinda a reductio ad absurdum of the concept of law in general, no? Of course anyone can choose to go rogue and disobey or subvert the rules. This doesn't mean that all regulations are equally pointless. Oversight policies can be judged by how effectively they can detect, deter, and sometimes even (albeit imperfectly) prevent abuses of power. There is likely no way to 100% guarantee perfect democratic accountability in any system in which a motivated conspiracy of people in power is possible, which is as far as I can tell all the systems in which anyone has power. The link explains the author's view of the systemic consequences of this change in policy fairly well, and it's definitely cause for concern, despite the fact that there's no magic bullet for this sort of thing