Explosive testimony is expected today in the Colorado hearing regarding former President Donald Trump’s eligibility to appear on the state’s primary ballot, as once conservative firebrand Republican Congressman Rep. Ken Buck is set to testify.

Buck, a highly respected member of Congress, just dropped a bombshell announcement yesterday, stating that he will not seek reelection. In his statement, Buck cited the refusal of many Republicans to acknowledge that Trump lost the 2020 election, as well as his role in the January 6th Capitol riot, as his reasons for stepping down.

Yesterday’s announcement is sure to put Buck centerstage in a court case that may eventually playout in the Supreme Court.

The case itself centers around a group of GOP and independent voters who are challenging Trump’s eligibility to run for office based on the 14th Amendment. This amendment, which was ratified after the Civil War, states that officials who engage in insurrection are disqualified from office.

The plaintiffs are relying on the testimony of legal scholar Gerard Magliocca to make their case. But the defense is confident that Buck’s testimony, along with that of other key witnesses like former Pentagon official Kash Patel and Trump campaign adviser Katrina Pierson, will prove that Trump did not incite violence and therefore should not be disqualified from running.

Magliocca’s interpretation of the 14th Amendment has been called into question, with evidence from historical sources showing that it was meant to apply broadly and has been enforced by state courts in the past.

Additionally, Trump’s defense team argues that his speech on January 6, where he encouraged supporters to “fight like hell,” was protected by the First Amendment and did not directly incite violence.

Judge Sarah Wallace, who is presiding over the case, is allowing the trial to move forward and hear more evidence before making a ruling. This comes after the Trump team’s request for a directed verdict was denied.

The case in Colorado is just one of three major challenges against Trump’s eligibility, with similar lawsuits filed in Minnesota and Michigan by the left-leaning group Free Speech for People. Tomorrow’s trial in Minnesota will continue to examine these issues and we eagerly await Buck’s testimony as the defense mounts its case.

Before he began his defense case Wednesday, Trump lawyer Scott Gessler asked Wallace for a “directed verdict” declaring that the challengers didn’t prove their case and that Trump should stay on the ballot.

But she rejected that request and let the trial proceed.

Gessler had argued that there is no evidence “that shows that President Trump in any manner, in any way, incited an insurrection, incited violence, incited a riot” under the Supreme Court precedent that says speech is protected under the First Amendment unless it spurs imminent lawless action.

Regarding Trump’s speech on January 6, when he told supporters to “fight like hell” – Gessler argued that “none of President Trump’s words were a call to violence.” He pointed out that the January 6 committee found that some of the unrest at the US Capitol began before Trump finished his speech.

READ MORE:

• COLORADO JUDGE IN TRUMP CASE REFUSES TO RECUSE AMID CRITICISM

• BUCK OPENS DOOR FOR NEW BLOOD IN COLORADO’S 4TH

• PETITIONERS CLAIM TRUMP INCITED VIOLENCE ON JANUARY 6TH

• HISTORIC EFFORT TO KEEP TRUMP OFF THE BALLOT BEGINS IN DENVER

The judge said she was “not prepared today to reconcile” the competing theories for how the First Amendment’s free speech protections interplay with the 14th Amendment’s insurrectionist ban.

“There’s clearly a conflict,” Wallace said. “On the one hand, you have people in the 1800s being disqualified for writing a letter to the editor. Clearly speech. On the other hand, you have a body of law holding the standards for finding incitement are very high, and the speech needs to be very specific.”