I'd like to react to a point made withing the actual SC thread:
The fact that previous liberal and conservative Presidents have been allowed to exercise the office without incident indicates that the Court, if respecting precedent and Atlasian history, would treat this as political. 'Not within the bounds of executive power' for ideological reasons would be something like a fascist or Pol Potist candidate.
No case has ever been brought before the court, but that doesn't mean no violations of the constitution were occuring, much like slavery was morally reprehensible even before the birth of abolitionism, or much like how atoms were crossing infinite space long before 19th century physics or even before Democritus.
On another note the lack of respect for the Court's independence and for the authority of our constitutional provisions in some quarters around here is unsettling. The Supreme Court issueing a ruling that is well within its jurisdiction and that presumably would be an example of well-reasoned legal thinking, isn't a 'coup' and anyone who has any belief in the Rule of Law should make clear, even at this point, that they will respect the Court's ultimate ruling.
