answered “[t]he president” and affirmed that “[t]he president lives in the White House[,]” there were no more questions from the court, counsel for Parents, or counsel for William. The court then expressed its “concern” that William lacked “a base knowledge . . . about the president,” stating that “he has to have some base level [of] understanding of the political process, of why he’s voting for a particular person, and I’m not getting that.” Acknowledging that William “expressed a desire when [counsel] asked him” about voting, the court then observed that “when I asked him very basic questions, he’s not able to respond.” Counsel for Parents objected that the court was creating an “additional burden, that’s not within the statute[,]” which requires only that the court decide whether William can “express” a “desire” to vote. Although counsel maintained that William’s knowledge of “current candidates,” “the current president,” a past president, and “who lives in the White House” . . . “represents about the base level knowledge of the average American citizen with respect to politics[,]” he pointed out that “[t]he question is not his knowledge base . . . or whether his parents talked to him, or whether they’re lifelong democrats, or life long republicans[,]” but instead “simply” whether he can “express his desire to vote. And he’s done so.” Nevertheless, the circuit court ruled that William had not “sufficiently expressed his desire on this issue[,]” because even though “he was responsive,” he did not “independently sufficiently express[] the desire” to vote. Even after counsel persuaded the judge to revisit the issue, she expressed her doubts by comparing William to her neighbor, whom she described as “midway” on “the autism spectrum” and “could discuss with me some level 26