A retired judge who heard arguments about whether former President Donald Trump should be allowed on the Illinois primary ballot sided with a group’s allegations that he took part in an insurrection on Jan. 6, according to a decision that will be considered by state officials this week.

The Illinois State Board of Elections is slated to vote Tuesday on whether to send retired Republican Judge Clark Erickson’s recommendation to a higher court, which would review whether Trump can indeed be barred from the state’s March 19 GOP primary election. The planned vote comes as the former president faces a Supreme Court fight on Feb. 8 that could determine his eligibility to run in all 50 states.

Erickson’s 21-page opinion held that Trump “engaged in [an] insurrection, within the meaning of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment,” he wrote on Sunday, two days after hearing lawyers for objectors and Trump make their cases Friday in a State Board of Elections hearing in Chicago.

The vote on Tuesday will decide whether to send the retired judge’s opinion up to a higher court. If that happens, the review and subsequent decision that will either uphold or reject Erickson’s opinion will become binding against Trump.

Free Speech for People, which is leading the Illinois ballot effort, lauded Erickson’s opinion as “significant” but contends that Illinois law allows the board to make the ballot decision without seeking a higher court’s input.

“We expect that the board and ultimately Illinois courts will uphold Judge Erickson’s thoughtful analysis of why Trump is disqualified from office, but — with the greatest respect — correct him on why Illinois law authorizes that ruling,” Ron Fein, the legal director for the group, wrote in a Sunday statement.

So far, Colorado and Maine are the only states to have removed Trump from the ballot pending appeal by the high court. The Illinois dispute is just one of dozens of challenges Trump is facing across the United States, which has led to an uneven tapestry of decisions that only the nation’s highest court can resolve in a consistent manner.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Trump’s campaign did not respond to the decision and could hold off from issuing a statement until the State Board of Elections decides whether the matter deserves serious scrutiny.

The Washington Examiner contacted Trump’s campaign for a response.