[McChordwatcher]

I believe that the ruling in Bush vs Gore was per curiam and hence, established nothing.... a one time only deal.

[AmishDude]

Maybe. But the arguments were sound and if it goes back to SCOTUS, it will come back with the same result as B v. G.

It seems to be irrelevant, though. WA will force a full recount if the winner flips. If the winner doesn't flip, no reason to sue.

[AndyTheBear]

I believe that the ruling in Bush vs Gore was per curiam and hence, established nothing.... a one time only deal.

They may not have wanted to establish a precedence, but I think they got one as far as partial recounts go. My take was the court was worried about lower courts expanding on the ruling until it was nearly impossible to run an election (as in why do I have to use a punch card, and that other guy gets to use a less error prone touch screen?).