Compelling? Why? What would success do to change Electoral vote?
Seriously?
The SCOTUS could rule as "unconstitutional" any election-rules changes made without the approval of the state legislature and/or the people of that state. That could open the door to potentially invalidating any votes that wouldn't have counted but for those unconstitutional election-rules changes. If those votes were then removed from that state's vote total, it could potentially flip the Presidential election outcome in that particular state. A lot of if's, could's, maybe's, potentially's, would's, and possibly's. And that would be for just that one state.
Given that today is "Safe Harbor" Day, and almost no positive outcomes have transpired, and it's only 6 days til the Electoral College meets, I'm again reducing my WAG guess for President Trump's reelection chances from 14% down to 12%. About four days after election day, I initially estimated Trump had a 25% chance of gaining a second term. Two weeks ago, I raised it to 27%. But since, then, I've been gradually reducing his reelection chances as events (mostly negative court outcomes) have transpired. I'll continue updating my WAG estimate as future events ensue .....
I’m assuming that the headline is erroneous. The Pennsylvania lawsuit was filed by Cong. Mike Kelly and two congressional candidates that “lost” because of a massive influx of mail-in ballots, which were authorized by the governor, the secretary of state and the state supreme court without consulting with the legislature - a direct violation of the state and US constitutions.
This is compelling because of the nature of the Pennsylvania lawsuit, which is not fraud-based (i.e., requiring the presentation of evidence), but an issue of constitutionality. Judges, by nature, are reluctant to be the deciding factor in anything that sets precedent or might be contentious. If the Pennsylvania lawsuit is supported by multiple other states, it’s far more likely to get the attention of SCOTUS.
I would add that the lawsuit filed by the State of Texas against Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia and Michigan could end up being a very big deal as well.
p.s. Justice Alito could issue an injunction against the seating of electors as early as today.
Perhaps because the Electoral College is in place to give all States say in who the President is - any State breaking it’s own election laws is, in-fact, rigging the Electoral College and disenfranchising its own citizens along with all the other States - to do such rigging, negates the efficacy/intent of the Electoral Collège.