More circular logic. You're the one who's insisting that this is a case of the judiciary exercising war powers. I've already pointed out to you that this is in reality a case of the executive branch exercising judiciary powers, and the judiciary branch holding the executive to the law.
Having "war powers" doesn't mean you don't have to obey the law when exercising those powers. If you disagree, feel free to point to the constitutional provision that supports you on that.
Here's your problem. You disagree with the Appeals Court and the SCOTUS in Quirin. Thats fine, but the circular logic thing is tiresome. I've posted the relevant section of Quirin which cites the Constitution. I'd be happy to post tha three judge panels opinion if you're having trouble finding it.
You, on the other hand, have posted nothing supporting your opinion which conflcits with the Appeals Court and Quirin. Until you do, you're blowing in the wind.