'Very worst decision': Legal analyst predicts Trump will 'face extreme headwinds' in Colorado case

Several states have unsuccessful challenged and are still in the process of challenging whether former President Donald Trump should remain on the 2024 ballot under the 14th Amendment's insurrection clause.

According to The New York Times, a Colorado judge on Friday ruled that the MAGA hopeful can keep his spot on the state ballot, and attorneys representing voters calling for Trump's disqualification from the race plan to appeal.

During Sunday's episode of MSNBC's Inside with Jen Psaki, Psaki noted that "a lot of the reporting suggests it could go to the Colorado Supreme Court next, and then ultimately to the [US] Supreme Court," before asking legal analyst Neal Katyal, who is "familiar with these processes," what might happen next.

"Yes, so I do argue appeals for a living, and I live in Colorado, so I'm very familiar with the Colorado Supreme Court," Katyal said. "I think [legal analyst] Andrew [Weissman] and you have it exactly right. If I were to put the headline on Friday night as an appeals lawyer, it would be, 'This is the very worst decision Donald Trump could get from the trial court.' Because it's going to go on appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court, perhaps the US Supreme Court, and there Trump is gonna face extreme headwinds. And the reason for that is the factual -- there's two parts, as Andrew says. There's a factual finding, that the judge said, which is Trump committed insurrection, and then there's a legal part that the 14th amendment doesn't apply to the office of the presidency. And on appeals, Jen, the factual findings get massive deference by the appeals court. It's almost impossible to overturn a trial judge's factual finding. You can overturn the legal findings, because that's basically a fresh look at the legal thing."

POLL: Should Trump be allowed to hold office again?

He continued, "And here, this judge factually made devastating findings against Trump, and then looked at this legal technicality, which was, 'Well the 14th amendment doesn't apply to the office of the president,' which is so weak, even the judge themselves admitted that this would be preposterous. And the reason for that is that there are other parts of the constitution that say that the president is an office holder of the united states, which is kind of obvious, and the text printed in bold when you flash the 14th amendment, says it applies to 'any office, civil or military, under the United States, as long as you taken an oath.' and of course, the president does take an oath. And it would be an insane reading otherwise — would mean [former Presidents] Jefferson Davis or Robert E. Lee could have run for the presidency in 1868. That could not possibly be the law, and I don't think that will command a majority of the Colorado Supreme Court, or certainly the United States Supreme Court."

Watch the video below or at this link.

'This is the very worst decision'': Legal expert predicts what happens next in Trump's Colorado caseyoutu.be

READ MORE: Supreme Court faces a 'desperate race against time' to avoid a 'Constitutional crisis'