they haven t really responded to any of this. but, look, there is no necessarily any urgency right now. for now, just by filing this appeal today, the former president s name will remain on the colorado ballot. so, the colorado secretary of state is going to certify the ballot in a couple of days on the 5th of january. and of course the voters don t go to the ballot boxes until march. so, somewhere between now and march, we might hear from the supreme court to settle this issue. and if the former president s disqualification from the main ballot, which he has appealed to a state court there, also eventually appealed to the u.s. supreme court, would that case and the ole kol case be combined? almost certainly. anderson, keep in mind, there s been a number of states this issue has popped up. you have had the opposite findings from courts in new hampshire, in michigan, in minnesota, for instance. and so these types of lawsuits
in insurrection. they also say that the congress, not state courts, should be the ones that determine the eligibility for the presidency. they also say that the 14th amendment, the letter if you read the 14th amendment, section iii, it doesn t mention the office of the presidency, and it doesn t apply, they say, to the former president. i ll read you a little bit more of what they argue. they say that this colorado ruling, if allowed to stand, will mark the first time in the history of the united states that the judiciary has prevented voters from casting ballots for the leading major party presidential candidate. obviously that is what s at stake here, anderson. you have, perhaps for the first time ever, the supreme court is going to take up what exactly that language means in the 14th amendment, whether it does apply to the presidency. do we know when the court will say whether it s going to take the case and what a timeline for arguments and a decision could look like? we don