Does declaring someone a disbeliever for enacting man-made laws require that they consider it permissible?

The student : Is his saying: if he considers it permissible, but if he does not consider it permissible, then he is not a disbeliever?

The Shaykh : ... In any case, the one who enacts a law in place of the divine law, whether he considers it permissible or not? ...
Rather, if he considers it better, he is a disbeliever. Even though the one who considers it permissible to judge by other than what Allah has revealed is a disbeliever, even if he does not judge by it. Whoever says: "It is permissible for us to judge by other than what Allah has revealed" is a disbeliever, even if he does not judge by it.
This is a problem that people often resort to, either by considering something permissible or by denying it. For example, they say: "Whoever abandons prayer while denying its obligation is a disbeliever." This is a distortion of the words from their proper places. This is a matter in which I inform you that the one who is stubborn in his opinion resorts to it, trying to twist the necks of the texts to fit what he says. For example: What did those who said "he does not become a disbeliever" do? They said: "Whoever abandons it while denying its obligation is a disbeliever." We say: Glory be to Allah, if you do that, you have committed two wrongs against the words of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). The first is that you interpreted the words in a way other than their apparent meaning, and the second is that you affirmed something the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did not say. The Messenger said: and he did not say "whoever denies it." Is there any doubt that he said "whoever denies it"? Then we say to you: Denial is disbelief, even if he prays. And the Messenger says: If a person said: "Prayer is not obligatory," but he is one who is consistent with it, being the first to enter the mosque and the last to leave, he is a disbeliever. How do you cancel the description of abandonment and bring in a new description to which you attach the ruling? This is a problem.
When it was said to Imam Ahmad regarding the saying of Allah the Exalted: they told him: "So-and-so says this about the one who considers it permissible to kill a believer." Imam Ahmad laughed and said: "Glory be to Allah, the one who considers it permissible to kill a believer is a disbeliever, whether he killed him or not" This is a distortion, and it is certainly laughable. Likewise, the one who considers it permissible to judge by other than what Allah has revealed is a disbeliever, whether he judges or not. The verse attached the ruling to the judgment: Do you understand now? This is a matter you should beware of. Beware of distorting words from their proper places for the sake of a belief you hold. Make your belief and your ruling on things follow the texts, and do not make the texts follow. If you make the text follow what you believe, then this is exactly following desires. Make yourself before the texts like a dead body before the washer; let the texts turn you, and do not turn them. This is the believer. But yes, sometimes some texts restrict others or specify others, or the understanding of the Shari'ah requires restricting the absolute or specifying the general, and the like. And this does not take us away from following the texts. Yes.