president’s relations with the courts contains useful information about the president’s authority to nominate people to become a judge or justice

Your Edwards chapter for this week on the president’s relations with the courts contains useful information about the president’s authority to nominate people to become a judge or justice, but remember the broader point that the president in a system of separation of powers experiences, as do the legislative branch and the judicial branch, a system of shared powers in separate institutions. More interesting than (not unimportant) judicial nominations is the way the courts may act as a brake on presidential power. That is your general focus in this question on the courts’ determination of the extent of presidential power. Recall President Trump’s famous claim in July 2019: “I have an Article 2, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president.” (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/article-ii-of-the-constitution-trumps-right-to-do-whatever-i-want-or-a-roadmap-for-impeachment/ar-AAJh3bb) Whenever there is a question about the extent of a president’s power, one of the primary sources consulted by scholars and attorneys is the 1952 Supreme Court case of Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer, and to the concurring opinion of Justice Jackson in particular. In the attached PDF I have abridged the case for you to include both the Jackson concurrence and, positioned first in the PDF, the opinion for the Court by Justice Black. Your task here is to explain their argument as to the constitutional sources of and limits on presidential power. You do not have to get tangled up in the various “legalisms” (“attorney speak”) along the way. Rather, using the PDF rather than our two textbooks, what do Black and Jackson argue about the constitutional sources of and limits on presidential power?