It would seem to me that the easiest thing for these states to do, after the dust has settled from this election, would be to change their election laws regarding recounts --- say, something to the effect of, "Automatic recount for a difference of 1% or less between the top two candidates; that the second-place candidate eligible to request a recount if _________ dollars is deposited in escrow, to be forfeited if the recount does not change the results of the contest; and that any candidate on the ballot is eligible to request a recount if fraud is alleged and if __________ dollars is deposited in escrow, to be forfeited if the fraud is not proven and the results of the recount does not change the results of the contest."
Then use some sort of formula to determine the amount of money that has to be deposited: say, $500/eligible voter on the election rolls in the first instance and triple that amount in the second instance.
Or something along those lines. Joe Schmoe, the local dogcatcher running for President, who receives two votes, should not be able to request a recount unless he wants to put up (and probably lose) a ton of money to allege fraud.
State legislatures never dreamed they would be forced to address this issue since the cost of a recount was prohibitive to candidates and the public embarrassment of looking like a ridiculous major fool.
Now we have rats funding the biggest losers for a multitude of nefarious reasons. They are in effect, destroying and making a mockery out of the election process.
The law is already written clearly. Stein doesn’t like it, and she’s trying to find a judge who will ignore the law and rule based on his/her feelings.