Here's the likely off-ramp the Supreme Court will take to let Trump stay on ballot: expert

The U.S. Supreme Court will almost certainly decide if Donald Trump is eligible to run for president after Colorado's Supreme Court disqualified him under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment — but they just as certainly would prefer to stay out of it.

The constitutional provision prevents anyone who takes part in an insurrection against the United States from holding elected office — which a Colorado judge found Trump had done, and the state's Supreme Court agreed.

But MSNBC columnist Jessica Levinson believes the nation's top court will reverse that finding.

"This is a court still smarting from the drip, drip, drip of ethical scandals," wrote Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School. "The justices know they are facing historically low approval ratings. A majority will likely believe that the best way to avoid it looking like they’re putting a thumb, let alone their full bodies, on the presidential scales is to allow Trump to appear on state election ballots."

The court could decide to punt on the case and find that it's not ripe for review, or the justices could say there's not enough evidence to conclude there was an insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, but Levinson identified a route they could take that would avoid the thorniest issues.

ALSO READ: Let fear be your greatest motivator in 2024

"But perhaps the most likely route for the court, if it does reach the merits, is for it to conclude that the plain language of the Constitution barring those who engaged in or supported an insurrection does not apply to candidates for the office of president of the United States," Levinson wrote.

"That’s what a Colorado lower court judge found. However, it makes little sense that the drafters of the 14th Amendment wanted to bar a county commissioner who joined an insurrection from serving in office but not the leader of the executive branch."

"In sum, it is not clear which legal route the Supreme Court will take to overturn the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision," she added. "But all signs point to the court looking for a short off-ramp to allow it to avoid a scarier sequel to the fallout after Bush v. Gore."