[Boot Hill]

inquest:   "No court has ever held that Congress's doesn't have the power to "infringe" the President's conduct of military ops or foreign policy. That's what's relevant here."

Actually, and despite your sincere assurances to the contrary, that's mostly irrelevant here.

FISA or no FISA, the President may continue to conduct his warrantless foreign intelligence gathering in full confidence of its legality and constitutionality, since he is armed with the decisions of virtually every court that has ever addressed this issue, who have concluded that the President had the inherent constitutional power to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance to collect foreign intelligence information, and that such surveillances constituted an exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment.

Every other argument is just window-dressing.

[inquest]

First you say that it's irrelevant that no court has held that Congress can't infringe on these powers of the President, then you say that he's "armed with the decisions of virtually every court that has ever addressed this issue" in believing that he can ignore Congress's regulations?

Both statements can't be right. In this case, both are wrong.