Thanks for the link. FWIW, I find the argument raised by the former prosecutor to be bizzare, and weak. Under his analysis, Congress can make NO statute that limits a president's warime powers, and that proposition is demonstrably false: see Korematsu, Milligan, etc.
It's not his premise, it's the Supreme court (and many other courts) ruling that Congress cannot limit an inherent Constitutional power by legislation. Congress cannot amend the Constitution by legislation, only through the specified amendment process.
The argument therefore has to be whether the power exercised is inherent and stems from the President's constitutional authority or whether it is derivative of that power. A derivative power can be "channeled" by legislation, but an inherent power cannot be limited.
All of the case law, and even the FISA law itself, specifically states that it cannot abridge the president's power in this regard. All of the Presidents since FISA have maintained this and Carter, Reagan and Clinton have all exercised this power in exactly this same manner without successful challenge. Clinton even used this power for purely domestic warrant-less wiretaps after the OKC bombing. That makes this settled law. If anyone bitches to Alito this week about this point he merely trots out that bon mot and the argument is over.