he belongs off the ballot. i don t know they ll go that far. i think they have a middle road, where they might say, well, 150 years have passed since that amendment was adopted, and times have changed. the congress really needs to address this, not the court. so, they ll find a middle ground. but yet, when they come to immunity, they ll come down hard and say there is no immunity for criminal prosecution for the president. so, i think that they re political in their own way, not partisan, necessarily. but in what works for the country when it needs it. shan wu, you heard a few of the arguments that elie laid out of what trump s team has been saying in response to this. it s not just one argument. there are several here. but part of it is they say the colorado supreme court, in their view, is wrong in saying that trump engaged in an insurrection. and that even if it was an insurrection and there was an insurrectionist ban, as we know there is, that it wouldn t apply to trump, given th
trump being on the ballot. how does the supreme court decision affect the other cases? it depends on what they will say. the expectation is they are going to provide some clarity on this constitutional question about section three of the 14th amendment. the so-called insurrectionist ban. this has been litigated across multiple states with varying outcomes. but if they don t offer clarity on that constitutional question, you are going to continue to see these challenges proliferate. in the past 48 hours we have seen new lawsuits in illinois and massachusetts. the job of the supreme court to again interpret and offer clarity to the states and to other courts on constitutional questions. so that is what we expect here. whatever they say would be binding on the states. but as joe noted it is not clear exactly which issues they are going to weigh in on. the other big question is what role does the state have to enforce that section? there are some other cases, other questions that they co
so-called insurrectionist ban or whether the president incited an insurrection. they didn t narrow down the list of questions. so probably it is just too early. maybe we will get that order that will tell us. but, everything has to break the way of the challengers in order for trump to be off the ballot. there are just so many ways that the supreme court could decide to keep trump on the ballot. that the odds have got to be with trump here. but as i think about this, trump s opening argument is leave this to congress. that actually seems quite dangerous. let me run for office. let me win election. and come january 6, 2025, let s congress decide if i m eligible to run. that sounds like a recipe for real political instability. and i hope the supreme court is not going to embrace that argument. it would give them an out, but set up the country for a really dangerous period of time.
decide whether states can ban former president donald trump from their primary ballots as he seeks reelection to the white house. cnn s paula reid has the details. reporter: this is the biggest election-related case for the supreme court since bush v. gore, here, the justices have accepted a petition from former president trump s lawyers to review whether the colorado supreme court made a mistake when they removed trump from the ballot. now, it s unclear exactly which questions or which issues the court will decide, but the big question in this case that has been litigated across multiple states with differing outcomes is whether section 3 of the 14th amendment of the constitution applies to presidents. now, this is a question that has divided even judges within one state, colorado. and this is a so-called insurrectionist ban, this section of the 14th amendment prohibits anyone who engages in an insurrection from holding future office, but this does not
state of colorado. this is so-called insurrectionist ban, and this section of the 14th amendment prohibits anyone who engages in insurrection from holding future office. but it does not say how it applies to the president, and that s one of the issues that the justices will likely have to weigh in on. the other big issue is how this is enforced. is it up to the states? is there a role for congress? right now they are not making clear the justices exactly which questions they intend to answer. lawyers are framing this case as a returnrn canandidates toto th choicece to the vovoters. ththey insist t trump condnduct exactly y when this s post civir papart of f the coconstitutiono meanant to protetect againstst. now hehere s how t this is goio gogo down.n. they havave a briefifing schedu that i in terms ofof the suprer coururt is expededited.. we l ll see those briefs soon. then on february 8th, there will be oral arguments, though there