Boater: The ruling was made by unelected Democrat judges .

So do you think that this case has merit and will be allowed to stand?

Dope1: The people who chant "We hAvE tO sAvE dEmOcRaCy!!!!" the most are the people who understand it the least. And would be the first ones to throw it away to get or maintain power.

If one of the liberals is reading this and agrees with what Colorado is trying to do, then, yes, that describes *you*.

You guys are hilarious. You're all about law and order and the sanctity of the courts until rulings don't go your way, then it's "what a bunch of idiots out to destroy democracy."

Although albaby1 is the lawyer here, since you asked, I'll opine.

The Colorado Supreme Court rendered an opinion that provided us with both factual and legal findings. On the factual side, it is now the second court to state that Donald Trump engaged in insurrection. The Colorado Supreme Court upheld the lower court's finding that Trump engaged in insurrection and reversed the lower court's finding that the president is not an officer of the United States and therefore is not included in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment (14.3).

So both courts found that Trump did not need to be charged with or convicted of insurrection to have committed the act.

Also of note: none of the judges that voted in the minority did so because they thought Trump hadn't participated in an insurrection. They dissented for other reasons.

If the USSC were to agree that Trump participated in an insurrection, then other states would have an easier path to disqualifying him from the ballot. Sort of. The high court would also have to concur on the legal findings of the Colorado Supreme Court.

Since the three dissenting votes in Colorado based their findings on local Colorado election law, the Supremes likely will steer clear of that.

Although albaby1 disagrees, the Colorado Supreme Court opinion seems written knowing it will reach the high court and intentionally quotes Justice Gorsuch when he was serving as a circuit judge in Colorado, first about constitutionally ineligible candidates and then again from Hassan v Colorado.

Will the Supremes decide the president is not an "officer" of the US, or that 14.3 doesn't apply to his oath because of the exact wording of that oath?

I have no idea.

I don't think Trump will be kept off the primary ballot -- there's just not enough time to meet the January 4th deadline. As far as the general election is concerned, it's pretty much a coin toss.

In the end, Colorado is meaningless: Trump has no chance of winning Colorado anyway. This will only matter with respect to actions that swing states might take based on the high courts findings.