Supreme Court has ruled on the executive branches limited legal authority, even during war time, via “Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer” (1952): https://en

Supreme Court has ruled on the executive branches limited legal authority, even during war time, via “Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer” (1952): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_%26_Tube_Co._v._Sawyer https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_%26_Tube_Co... That being, “The President did not have the inherent authority to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress.” My rewording, “The President [does] not have the inherent authority to [do anything] in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the Constitution or statutory authority conferred on [them] by Congress.” — Question then is did Constitution or Congress authorize this, directly or indirectly prior to or retroactively after the fact?