How will SCOTUS rule on the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling?
resolved Mar 4
Fully reverse the ruling
Affirm the ruling of the lower Court
Affirmed in part with condition that Donald Trump must be convicted first

The Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Donald Trump cannot appear on the Republican primary ballot on the basis that Trump has violated the 14th amendment's ban on insurrection.

I will resolve N/A if no ruling is made.

A clarification now that SCOTUS thinking has started being reported on:

  1. If they reverse the ruling based on the idea that only Congress can enforce Section 3, I will consider this Fully reversing the ruling.

I recognize that there may be some grey areas in how to resolve this market. I reserve judgment on any ambiguities, and I may resolve the market as N/A if it is too ambiguous.

Get Ṁ200 play money

🏅 Top traders

#NameTotal profit
Sort by:

"Because the Constitution makes Congress, rather than the states, responsible for enforcing section 3 against all federal officeholders and candidates, we reverse" - Basis for my resolution

How does this resolve if the Supreme Court says something like "For the time being, Trump can remain on the ballot, but we are open to revisiting this if he's convicted in the January 6 case"?

bought Ṁ50 of Other YES

My prediction here is that we will get one of two outcomes:

-hold the case until after 1/5 and then either deny cert or dismiss as moot


-a result that Trump can stay on the ballot but with no single opinion or rationale that commands 5 votes

I think neither of these are presented in the current (non-other) answers

These are the actual words SCOTUS uses in their decisions [source]. Affirm, reverse, and remand can be applied to individual points/idea/arguments/ruling. The Colorado Supreme Court decision reviewed 8 rulings (points) made by the District Court in this matter, each of which could be affirmed, reversed or remand by SCOTUS.

You might want to map each options to at least one of these words and one of the 8 rulings. SCOTUS might be asked to review (Writ of Certiorari) a subset of the rulings or other procedural issues, we don't know yet. The writ itself could also be dismissed but very unlikely.

  • Affirmed - the judgment of the lower court is correct and should stand.

  • Affirmed in part - a portion of the judgment of the lower court was affirmed.

  • Dismissed - an order that disposes of the matter without a trial of the issues involved on their merits.

  • Dismissed as improvidently granted - the Writ of Certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted, meaning the Court should not have accepted the case. 

  • Dismissed for want of jurisdiction - the Court lacks jurisdiction to decide the question on which certiorari was granted

  • Remanded - send back the matter to the court from which it was appealed.  When a judgment is reversed, the Court usually remands the matter for a new trial to be carried out consistent with the principles announced in its opinion.

  • Remanded in Part - a portion of the judgment of the lower court was remanded.

  • Reversed - changes to the contrary to opinion of the lower court/body.

  • Reversed in Part - part of the judgment of the lower court was reversed.

  • Vacated - sets aside the judgment of the lower court.

  • Vacated in Part - part of the judgment of the lower court was set aside, or vacated.

@Calvin6b82 thanks I've adjusted them to match the wording.

More related questions