Lay down your law books now they’re no damn good
By 
The SCOTUS has agreed to hear the Colorado disqualification case.
A few points:
(1) That Trump is an insurrectionist is not in any real doubt. That he can be disqualified from the presidency by a state court ruling via Section 3 of the 14th amendment, absent either a federal authorizing statute or a criminal conviction, is unfortunately one of those technically complicated legal questions that come up when you try to decide things on the basis of legal documents drafted under radically different legal and political conditions 155 years ago.
(2) Someone who is better at the Constitution please take this one on: Should it be, technically speaking, even an option for the SCOTUS to allow a single state or multiple state courts, as opposed to the federal courts speaking ex cathedra, to disqualify Trump from a federal election on the basis of a state court’s interpretation of federal law? Isn’t the procedural posture here that, as a matter of constitutional law, he’s either everywhere or he’s eligible nowhere?
(3) If you’re arguing over whether a bona fide insurrectionist is legally eligible to be the presidential candidate of one of the two major political parties, you’re already at DEFCON 1, legally and politically speaking, no matter what the answer turns out to be.