I think the key phrase in the summary is "without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." Why is it necessary for

I think the key phrase in the summary is "without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." Why is it necessary for the president to be able (by himself, from what I understand) to shut down entire networks without regard to law? Don't the other two branches exist to write and decide laws? What is the point of a check and balance if this action can be taken without regard to law? Also, why aren't the security policies of the network providers good enough? If the US were under a serious cyber-attach (which actually happens a lot), wouldn't the providers just shut down the offending IPs? Why is it necessary for entire networks to be at the mercy of the government? Perhaps I don't understand the internet well enough. Would someone be able to enlighten me? Note: I am neither a political scientist or an internet engineer. If any part of what I said doesn't make sense to someone who understands these issues better than I do, please correct me.