Justice Earls’s majority opinion sensibly presents three categories of individuals who purport to hold elected offices. One category consists of de jure officers, those who in fact have a legal right to the office. A second consists of de facto officers, those who occupy an office under some color of right but whose title is not in fact good in law. As Earls acknowledges, under established doctrine such individuals “may exercise the power attendant to that office in ways that bind third parties and the public.” The third category consists of usurpers, those who take possession of an office without any authority.

Will the US Supreme Court eventually have to rule on the matter of those who have unconstitutionally assumed office?

Judicial nullification of the executive violates seperation of powers. So the judges become the executive.