In an unprecedented move, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled earlier this week that former President Donald Trump is ineligible to appear on ballots in the state.

Many legal observers say the ruling is unsound, however, with one predicting that the United States Supreme Court will overturn it with a unanimous decision.  

"Nine to zero ruling"

Ty Cobb served as an attorney in Trump's administration, and according to The Hill, he told CNN on Tuesday that Americans should expect a "nine to zero" ruling.  

"I think this case will be handled quickly. I think it could be 9-0 in the Supreme Court for Trump," Cobb insisted. "I do believe it could be 9-0, because I think the law is clear."

The case arose out of Section 3 of the Constitution's 14th Amendment, which is commonly referred to as the "Insurrection Clause." It states,

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Former White House lawyer: Supreme Court "will not hesitate to move quickly"

"The real key issue in this case is — is Trump an officer in the United States in the context in which that term is used in the Article 3 of the 14th Amendment," Cobb noted.

"And in 2010, Chief Justice [John] Roberts explained in [Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Oversight Board] that people don’t vote for officers of the United States," he added. 

"The Supreme Court though will not hesitate to move quickly on this; they know what the stakes are. They know what their responsibility is," the former White House attorney continued.

"And they can delay some of these Colorado dates to the extent that they feel they’re obligated to or have to," Cobb stressed.

Law school professor calls ruling "anti-democratic"

Meanwhile, George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley told Fox News host Brian Kilmeade on Wednesday that he is "deeply" bothered by the Colorado ruling.

"This is exceptionally dangerous. I mean, it is an anti-democratic opinion, and it could set us on a course that would be incredibly destabilizing for our system," Turley warned.

"This is introducing the ability of states to effectively block the leading candidate for the presidency by barring them from ballots, and it will result in a tit-for-tat," he pointed out.

"And this is something that is quite familiar in other countries," Turley pointed out, adding "This is the way things are in places like Iran, where they have ballot cleansing, where you have people in government tell you who's just not appropriate for you to vote for."