The US Supreme Court held the first hearing and heard oral arguments from the parties in a landmark case on whether Trump can run for president.

The 9-judge court heard arguments from Colorado state officials and Trump's lawyers, who ruled that Trump committed the crime of "insurrection" for his role in the January 6, 2021 raid on Congress and that he cannot run for office under Article 14, Section 3 of the Constitution.

Trump's lawyers argued that the article in question cannot be applied by a state to the president or a presidential candidate, that the person referred to in this article is not directly the president, and that even if a decision is to be made on this issue, the real authority here lies with the US Congress, not the states.

Trump's lawyers argued that Trump's role in the Congressional raid was not an "uprising" and that it was a misinterpretation of the article for states to block a presidential candidate based on this article.

Biden once again asked for votes from black voters! Biden once again asked for votes from black voters!

On the other hand, lawyers representing the state of Colorado argued that Article 14, paragraph 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution is clear and that Trump and his supporters were in an act of insurrection and rebellion against the Constitution by storming Congress.

State officials said that the states have a say on the basic requirements for a person to become President of the United States, just as they have a say on this issue.

TOUGH QUESTIONS FOR COLORADO JURISTS FROM COURT MEMBERS

Most of the justices who heard the parties asked Colorado lawyers tough questions about why the relevant clause of the Constitution could apply to Trump.

Justice Elena Kagan, from the liberal wing of the Court, said that states have limited authority to determine whether a presidential candidate falls within the clause of the Constitution and whether that person participated in a riot.Justice Samuel Alito, from the conservative wing of the Court, said that if one state's ruling on this issue were applied to presidential candidates, other states could turn it into a political apparatus and "decide for or against a presidential candidate and decide the fate of the election," which would be dangerous for the country.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, another conservative, said that Colorado's legal experts had failed to substantiate the charges of sedition and insurrection against Trump, and that the state could not take such a step without any other judicial process.

Due to the ongoing presidential process, the US Supreme Court is expected to reconvene soon to evaluate the case and announce its decision.In the news reflected in the American media, the first hearing resulted in a result in favor of Trump, and the case is expected to result in a decision that Trump cannot be prevented from participating in the elections.