You wrote up a bunch about technicalities of pardons and push back on over reach but it’s actually really simple. If he wants something illegal done, he signs a paper that says to do it and another absolving them for carrying out the order.

Nobody will care about over reach because every functional position in the government is now a political position. If your loyalty wavers for even a second, you’re fired (or worse). Federal oversight is replaced by state surveillance, you can be sure that rogue chef or secret service agent would have eyes watching their every move.

Even if the SC sets themselves up as the final arbiters on legality, that doesn’t protect them from illegal orders targeting them. For example: tough to oppose a president from a jail cell or if all of your assets are seized for the Sovereign Wealth fund.

Your point on state opposition is one that I’ll grant, that’s probably the storybook (legal) ending to this if there was one. The best case scenario would turn into a cold civil war, with states finding ways to oppose the federal government while coordinating some measure of support for each other.

The most likely ending isn’t that or a rogue assassin, but a palace coup. Popular unrest allows the military to step in and overthrow the head of state. The power remains centralized and unconstitutional; you’re now at the whim of the heads of military.

But at least the military industrial complex isn’t beholden to the whims of every foreign government with a blank check. They already have way more power and influence than any random elected politician, and maintaining the US hegemony is their main goal.