A little strategy would be noce by the Trump team. I think what they did is rule that the President is not immune not necessarily that he is guilty of anything. Isn’t it possible on that narrow question Scotus concurs? I think it would be wise to get a broader question before the courts. Don’t take this to SCOTUS because they always look for a narrow decision and this gives them an easy way to say they haven’t ruled on the totality of the 14th but it will be enough to keep Trump off ballots until something more specific works it’s way through. I think the initial ruling purposely used the immunity argument because of how narrow that would make the appeal question.
Was discussed that the hoops for the majority opinion to jump through were enormous and if any one of their (almost dozen) points gets shattered, their entire decision falls flat.