This basically flips the judicial review logic from "did the regulator act within the scope of the law?" to "are there other ways the regulator could have acted that would also be within the scope of the law? If so, the judge decides which set of actions the regulator must take"

I.e., anything Congress does not explicitly state in a law is now determined by federal judges. At the extreme, this is aggrandizing a very wide scope of power to low-level federal judges to essentially ignore congressional intent.

The entire purpose of the judiciary is to interpret the law. This is what they are supposed to do.

Chevron curtailed this essential power in favor of taking an agency at its word, which is quite a dangerous stance.

The agencies still had to act within their bounds, and they have a lot more relevant expertise than effectively-random judges.

Plus centralizing it makes things much more clear and consistent.

Hell, if we just took regulatory agencies and put judges in charge somehow that would be a lot better than chaos mode.

Pretty sure some agencies already have specialist judges assigned to them.. I'm thinking of the NLRB.