As I understand it scholars generally agree that the modern president is far more powerful then originally intended by the founders of the constitution.
Over the generations presidents have been slowly been claiming more and more power mostly by slowly usurping more of the power from the congress. For example only Congress can declare war, but that doesn't matter much any more when the president's have taken to simply sending troops into combat situations without an official declaration of war. Only Congress can pass laws, but the president can not only veto a law as passed by retroactively veto any existing law by offering a blanket pardon to it and/or refuse to prosecute it (as is done with federal marijuana laws). Similarly a president can write decrees on how laws should be interpreted and past president's have practically written new laws and policy via presidential decree significantly changing how existing law should be interpreted etc.
Trump has added to this by getting around congress refusal to fund a wall by reallocating military funds congress had intended for other uses. And recently the white house has implied it would refuse to cooperate with congressional panel for impeachment. However, this question is not about Trump specifically, but the role of US president in general, my point is that this trend is not just a historical trend, but one that continues up to the modern day.
In every case the slow usurpation of power follows the same pattern. A president does something to get around the limitation as president that is somewhat controversial and/or is a legal gray area. Whatever political party he is not part of complains and hems and halls, but whatever was done is never enough to impeach, and short of impeachment (or the supreme court ruling an action unconstitutional, which ironically is only a power the supreme court has due to a president threat to undermine the supreme court early on..) there is little that can be done. Thus a precedent is set, and future presidents do the same thing until this new behavior becomes common place and just considered a part of the presidential powers; then a new president takes another tiny step towards claiming power by taking another semi-controversial step. rinse and repeat.
Over time the net result is that power is slowly, but constantly, slipping towards to president. It's a very slow process, but at the same time it's a process that been happening for as long as the US has existed and hasn't stopped yet, which implies power will continue to seep to the president over time in the future.
Lets say that either congress specifically, or the american people in general, start to get worried about how much power the president has claimed? What could realistically be done to curtail the presidential power, or at least pevent it from continuing to grow, to keep the president closer to the power originally intended by the founders of the constitution?
Short of revolt the only option I can think of is an amendment written in such a way as to reign in the presidential power. However, given how hard it has been historically to get amendments passed, and the fact that a president is going to belong to a political party that is likely going to want to protect their president's power, and also will likely represent almost half of any congress, it seems rather difficult to imagine any congress managing to pass an amendment designed to limit the growth of presidential power.
Is there any other realistic situation in which the continue seeping of power to the president may be halted or reverted, assuming this was something desired by the American people?