@realcaseyrollins@social.teci.world @AltonDooley @realcaseyrollins@noauthority.social @volkris @Hyolobrika I'm adding the second screenshot again, because it seems to be diverted from the thread.
![Text:
No matter the context, the President’s authority to act necessarily “stem[s] either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself.” Youngstown, 343 U. S., at 585. In the latter case, the President’s authority is sometimes “con- clusive and preclusive.” Id., at 638 (Jackson, dJ., concur- ring). When the President exercises such authority, he may act even when the measures he takes are “incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress.” Id., at 637. The exclusive constitutional authority of the President “dis- abl[es] the Congress from acting upon the subject.” Id., at 637-638. And the courts have “no power to control [the President’s] discretion” when he acts pursuant to the pow- ers invested exclusively in him by the Constitution. Mar- bury, 1 Cranch, at 166.](media_attachments/files/112/754/146/546/289/487/original/0cbb68f22c519faf.png)
Text: No matter the context, the President’s authority to act necessarily “stem[s] either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself.” Youngstown, 343 U. S., at 585. In the latter case, the President’s authority is sometimes “con- clusive and preclusive.” Id., at 638 (Jackson, dJ., concur- ring). When the President exercises such authority, he may act even when the measures he takes are “incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress.” Id., at 637. The exclusive constitutional authority of the President “dis- abl[es] the Congress from acting upon the subject.” Id., at 637-638. And the courts have “no power to control [the President’s] discretion” when he acts pursuant to the pow- ers invested exclusively in him by the Constitution. Mar- bury, 1 Cranch, at 166.