Jackson's View

Justice Jackson provides us with three categories in which the president has the ability to exercise power, and he ranks them in order of how legitimate that power usage is. First the President may act with express or implied consent from Congress giving him most legitimacy. Second, he may act when congress has been silent on the issue, and third, he can go against express congressional orders with this category having no legitimacy at all. Jackson believes the limits of the President are determined by the Congress and that Congress is the only one that can give the President power and reduce its own. In this way, the Executive branch answers to the Legislative Branch as a way to limit the Executive Branch's power.

It also seems to me that Jackson is saying that the Court exists as a protector of Congressional rights in certain situations. And that the court must be the last institution to be allowed to change. The court is there to ensure it keeps check on Presidential Power that is not always kept in check by Congress. And by protecting the Executive Branch from receiving too much power, it is in effect protecting Congressional power that Congress may have given away unconstitutionally.

Jackson's view is similar to the framing of the constitution. He believes that power should not be shared and the Congressional Powers must be kept separate from Executive powers and he makes clear that the Executive Branch has no power to legislate or go beyond its means as enumerated in the Constitution. The government must now ensure that it uses its power properly and that it does not go beyond that. IF they do, the Court should be there to stop the offender and protect the victim.