i think because that january 6th report was entered into evidence in colorado and the colorado district court that decided this actually used the jan 6 report as part of the finding as to why it was an insurrection, i think that that really makes it so there s a direct conflict for her, and she cannot it s his wife. and i think he has to recuse himself. i think if this was i think if it was any other court or any other judge, they would recuse themselves. but i think it s pretty clear here that there s a conflict. but that decision is solely up to him. solely up to him. all right. appreciate it, karen freedman agnifilo, jennifer rogers, rick hassan as well. coming up, a look at the former president s take on january 6th, the facts, and what his attempt to reshape those facts say about him and the moment we re in. and later the man who put the national rifle association at the center of republican politics stepping down as its leader.
someone engaged in it? and i think that s going to be the major question that they grapple with. rick, we don t know how narrow a ruling the supreme court might come back with. there are obviously questions about whether the president is considered, as we were just talking about, an officer of the government, whether states can enforce the so-called insurrectionist ban, whether or not the former president incited an insurrection. how far do you think they might go? in their order today, as joan mentioned earlier, they didn t narrow down the list of questions. probably it s just too early. maybe we ll get that order that will tell us. everything has to break the way of the challengers in order for trump to be off the ballot. there are so many ways that the supreme court could decide to keep trump on the ballot that, you know, the odds have got to be with trump here. as i think about this, you know, trump s opening argument is, leave this to congress. and that actually seems quite da
roberts. and that s where they had to decide what were they going to do there. this was the first time they were meeting in person, as all these filings had come in this week. and then, anderson, i have to say, it took several hours for them to announce what they were doing. and i just wonder how much they struggled with whether they were going to already, kind of, narrow some of the issues or if they just wanted to quickly get out, as they did, we re taking the case and we ll iron out things later. i m sure that they saw this marching toward them, and now they re ready to they re ready to act swiftly on it. and i think they realize the moment for them themselves that however they rule, they re going to set a tone for how to regard democratic norms as we re on the eve of such an important set of primaries, then the ultimate election in november of this year. joan biskupic, thanks. paula reid. more perspective from karen freedman agnifilo, also jennifer rogers. also rick hassan, aut
duty-bound to bar him from the ballot. if not them, then voters or perhaps another candidate should sue, and that is exactly what happened in colorado where a group of republican and unaffiliated voters argue trump was not qualified, and they won in the state s supreme court. now, the issue is in front of the country s supreme court where the nine justices are being asked by both colorado and just now donald trump to weigh the constitution against the rights of voters. trump argues that taking him off the ballot would be the very definition of anti-democratic. and some legal scholars say trump may have a point. rick hassan, an election law expert, and director of the safeguarding democracy, says trump s argument is a strong legal document, it does raise serious and difficult questions, including whether this is, one, a free speech issue, or two, one
doris, finally, you want a televised trial. rick hassan, the constitutional scholar at ucla writes, u.s. v trump will be the most important case in our nation s history. you know the history. do you think it will be, at least up to this point? without a question. i mean, this really is a test now of democracy. i know that all sounds so abstract, but as i say, democracy is so simple. you have to accept that the people who lose, accept the loss. and that s what allows us to distinguish ourselves from other people around the country, around the world, and i think if this trial shows that was not accepted and acts were taken to change the results of it, as a result of it, and that s wrong and against democracy, it will be the most important trial in the country, bar none. this is a moment as important as 1860 was. it took a civil war to solve that. let s hope we can do it through our own understanding, education, through television