\n<\/p>\n
U.S. Supreme Court Justices are expected to decide to keep Donald Trump on the ballot for the Colorado primary.<\/p>\n
The expectation comes as even the liberal justices seemed skeptical of Colorado\u2019s case.<\/p>\n
Justice Elena Kagan asked Colorado attorney Jason Murray, \u201cThe question you have to confront is why a single state should decide who gets to be president of the United States.\u201d<\/p>\n
Justice Alito said, \u201cThe consequence of what the Colorado Supreme Court did, as some people claim, would be quite severe. Would it not lead to the possibility that other states would say \u2026 that the decision of the Colorado of the Supreme Court could decide this question for many other states, perhaps all other states? Could it not lead to that consequence?<\/p>\n
Chief Justice John Roberts asked for a greater definition of insurrection. \u201cIf there\u2019s some debate about it \u2026 eventually what we would be deciding, whether it was an insurrection when one president does something as opposed to when somebody else does something else \u2013 what do we do? Do we wait until near the time of counting the ballots and go through which states are valid and which states aren\u2019t?\u201d<\/p>\n
Justice Brett Kavanaugh noted that \u201cPresident Trump has not been charged with [insurrection]. So what are we to make of that?\u201d<\/p>\n
Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked Murray if he thought the Supreme Court should disregard lower court findings and wanted the justices to \u201cjust watch the video of President Trump on the Ellipse and make a decision?\u201d<\/p>\n