“One reason people seek bad arguments and excuses for the Supreme Court is that they are afraid of Trump and and his followers. Trump has threatened "bedlam" if his name is not on the ballots. Aside from proving (if proof were needed) that he is an insurrectionist, this illustrates very clearly what constitutional government cannot allow. Should the Court yield in advance to the threat of violence, it is no longer a court and this is no longer a rule-of-law state. The whole point of Section 3 is to allow the Constitution to defend itself against those who would use violence to overturn our constitutional order.”

“Their intention was to provide a simple measure to prevent the next insurrection from reaching such a terrifying and existential point. The words of Section 3 are clear. The history only reaffirms their enormous significance for our present and future.”

“Most discussions of this case, Trump v. Anderson, are about the politics. Commentators assume that the Court will behave as politicians. If no one is given credit for doing anything except seeking excuses for what they want to do anyway, then bad arguments get currency. The purpose of constitutional order, of course, is to provide a framework above politics, one which allows a decent sort of politics to prevail. If no one takes the meaning of the Constitution seriously, then such an order cannot long be sustained.”

“From the people who wrote Section 3 to those who were affected by it: all understood that non-insurrection was a qualification for office (25:25). As the twenty-five historians conclude, "decision-makers crafted Section 3 to cover the President and to create an enduring check on insurrection, requiring no additional action from Congress" (25:2).”

“Everyone, in other words, knew that Section 3 applied to a candidacy for the office of president of the United States. This included Jefferson Davis himself, who understood that he had been disqualified by Section 3 from seeking office (5:25-30).”

“In public, in media, and now in briefs, those who wish to show that Colorado did err make three bad arguments. They amount to excuses for the Supreme Court not to apply the plain wording of the Constitution. Here they are:

1. The president of the United States is not "an officer of the United States."

2. Trump is disqualified only if convicted of a crime or when Congress passes a law.

3. Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment applies only to the 1860s.

A majority of the members of the Supreme Court advertise themselves as people who attend to the plain wording of the Constitution, or to its meaning as understood by framers, legislators, or people at the time.”