The Concurring Opinion of Justice Jackson

In the concurring opinion of Justice Jackson, he lays out three "over-simplified" groupings of situations in which a President's may doubt his own power, or be challenged by others. The first situation occurs when the President is acting along with Congress, and here his power is at its maximum. The second is when the President acts when there is no congressional grant or denial of authority specifically stated, therefore he is acting within his own discretion. The third is when the President acts against the implied will of Congress, therefore Jackson states that the President's power is at its "lowest ebb."

By stating these three situations, Jackson seems to understand that the President does not need the consent, or even the approval, of Congress to make decisions or act. However, he does not appear to be to fond of this notion. He says that the Court comes into play when the President is in "a zone of twilight" or when he is acting against the will of Congress. During these times, the court's role is to make sure that the presidents actions are constitutional.

In relation to the Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. case, Jackson's opinion seems to lean towards the idea the Truman acted wrongly. However, his wrongdoings are specific to this case and Jackson makes it clear that the president should have complete control over his role as Commander in Chief, so much of Jackson's opinion is concurrent with the U.S. Constitution, because he is quite skeptical of giving the President too much power. Thusly, he supports the same sort of checks and balances that are outlined in our Constitution.