Is the US Constitution irrelevant?

Thomas Sowell raises an issue here that should truly concern every American.  Executive orders have been used by presidents many times over the years and for many different reasons, some appropriate and some not.  The danger of the use of these orders lies in the ability of the executive branch to circumvent the will of the people as expressed by the Congress.  It is the Congress alone that has the authority to make laws and while the executive branch has to interpret the law in order to carry out its responsibility to execute it, the executive has no write to overturn aspects of a given law it may disagree with.  And yet this is what is happening with great frequency in the Obama administration no doubt because progressives don't really believe in the Constitution.  As Sowell points out, freedom is lost in increments, not all at once.  Do we really want an imperial executive as the head of our government to the extent he is the final arbiter of what the law says and how it is to be executed?  The point here is do we want to return to the 17th century idea of a benevolent tsar, like Peter the Great, for example.  Peter the Great did many impressive things for his country including creating the city of St. Petersburg and bringing Russia into conformity with all the advances of European countries of that time.  He also beheaded those who displeased him for any reason, took the country into war for any reason he wanted and favored some over others because he liked them more.  He was the justice and legislative systems rolled into one autocrat.  Okay if you were one of the favored few maybe, not so good if you weren't.  Most Americans would not like to return to those days.