LOL, several points, if I may...
1. Your use of, not just a double-negative, but a triple-negative, makes your sentence all but incomprehensible!
2. Congress has the authority, under the Necessary and Proper clause, to regulate the powers granted the executive by the Constitution, but only in so far as those regulations are for the purposes of "carrying into execution" those powers, not limiting or infringing them. The very words of the Necessary and Proper clause, as well as the doctrine of the Separation of Powers would prohibit such infringement.
3. But your discussion of the constitutionality of congressional infringement of the President's powers is irrelevant in the face of this: Even the FISA court itself has concluded that the President has the inherent constitutional power to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information. If he has the power, then it hasn't been infringed.
Attention span not your strong suit? His powers of surveillance are not uninfringible by Congress. You hadn't contested that. Better?
2. Congress has the authority, under the Necessary and Proper clause, to regulate the powers granted the executive by the Constitution, but only in so far as those regulations are for the purposes of "carrying into execution" those powers, not limiting or infringing them.
It also has the power under the military clauses to regulate military matters. And given that the administration has specifically cited a war resolution in its justification of this program, that makes this a military matter.
Also, if the "necessary and proper" clause gives Congress the power to give the President tools with which to carry out his functions, it also has the power to withdraw those tools, in whole or in part.
3. ... Even the FISA court itself has concluded that the President has the inherent constitutional power to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information. If he has the power, then it hasn't been infringed.
Non sequitur.