I assume you're talking about his power to open up the states for business, and I bet some moronic lefty lawyers on CNN and MSNBC told you he couldn't do it. Democrats are so gullible. Of course he could find away to lift the state's stay-at-home order. Every attorney learns about it in our first semester at school. It's called the commerce clause. What's that you say?
The commerce clause is the provision that gives legislative branch power over interstate commerce, and the Supreme Court has expanded that definition to mean any commercial activity that has an effect on interstate commerce (almost everything does). The President has the power to enforce the commerce clause for congress. If the President didn't have this ability, he wouldn't be able to use executive powers to create the healthcare agencies and programs that Congress granted in the ACA. The President can also allow businesses to open up in states with a stay-at-home orders, because those businesses use interstate supply chains and credit transactions that are processed by banks in other states. Most likely Delaware.
https://www.cato.org/blog/wall-emergency-even-legal-under-existing-law-violates-separation-powers
The Doctrine of Pre-emption provided in the supremacy clause of the constitution means that federal laws and orders take priority over conflicting state law that would undermine federal law or action that seeks to govern interstate commerce. All that is required for the law or action to be constitutional is that there be a rational basis between the effect of the order and interstate commerce, and the court's will limit a power appropriately reserved to state's per the 10th Amendment to further the commerce clause action. For example,
Philadelphia v New Jersey (1976), the Court struck down a New Jersey law that prohibited the importation of garbage into the state. Concluding that garbage was "commerce," the Court viewed the law--despite its environmental justification--as unconstitutional discrimination agains out-of-state commerce. The Court held that as long as reasonable, non-discriminatory alternatives exist that serve the states legitimate interests, they must be used instead of a discriminatory ban.
If the powers of interstate commerce fails to provide the executive branch with the power to lift the state's stay-at-home order, the President could just enact a state of emergency.