They do not yet understand what disqualifies the former president, namely an insurrection or rebellion against the constitution. They have argued the cases as if he is disqualified because he engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States.
My god, what an asinine distinction to make. What difference does it make? The United States hardly exists without the Constitution and vice-versa. They’re as close to one and the same as you can legally get, especially regarding insurrection and disloyalty against either.