Constitution

Far be from me to argue with SCOTUS but this decision seems to be a cart before the horse argument.

It might be accurate if applied to the Continental Congress but the proper progression was from declaration of independence, successful revolution, nation (not really accurate since we are a union of states), constitution, federal government including the creation of the office of president.

The constitution created the office of president of the united states, congress, and the very branch that rendered this decision. None of them existed before there was a constitution.

Just my opinion for what it's worth.

The point they make is that the Constitution was not needed for the country and the executive to exercise powers;

"[T]he investment of the federal government with the powers of [conducting foreign affairs] did not depend upon . . . the Constitution. The powers to declare and wage war, to conclude peace, to make treaties, to maintain diplomatic relations with other sovereignties, if they had never been mentioned in the Constitution, would have vested [fixed] in the federal government as necessary concomitants [parts] of nationality [being an independent nation] . . ."

and

". . . by the Unites States being a sovereign (politically independent) nation before the Constitution was written, that it had certain inherent (natural) powers to conduct international relations regardless if written in the Constitution or not."