[Kenny Bunk]

The Supreme Court operates under the Rule of Four when granting cert. to hear an appeal. There just aren’t four current Justices who have found sufficient merit in the briefs that have been submitted. It should be noted that none of the constitutionalist/conservative attorneys who have a proven track record of successfully arguing appeals before the Supreme Court have gone anywhere near the eligibility issue. Even more importantly, none of the people with perfect standing to challenge eligibility, the people who received electoral votes and had a legitimate chance to be elected (Mc Cain, Palin, Romney or Ryan) decided to file suit, join an existing suit as co-plaintiffs or even submit a “Friend of the Court” (amicus) brief in support of any eligibility lawsuit. The fact that the candidates denied office by an allegedly ineligible candidate didn’t file a complaint definitely influences judges and justices.

All quite technically correct, quite true, and yet somehow quite all beside the point. To those of us making a legitimate inquiry, the SCOTUS seems determined, by the admission of several justices, to dodge the issue, at least until after the present POTUS is safely gone. Perhaps if the republic is to have a much longer run, their POV may prove to be more historically valid than mine.

[Nero Germanicus]

If a strong enough legal argument was to be presented, it would get serious consideration. No one has yet made a serious challenge. 201 original jurisdiction lawsuits have failed; many because the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring the suit. You need the political party or the candidates that were denied the office to be plaintiffs. Without them, there is no chance of success.
It’s like suing for divorce without the abused spouse filing but only her/his relatives, friends and acquaintences trying to sue on their behalf.
Also, the Supreme Court has no constitutional power to unseat a sitting president and only one application for a stay of the 2008 election result reached them before Obama was elected in 2008. The application for a stay was denied by Justice Souter. Every other appeal was asking SCOTUS to reverse the outcome of a national election, under separation of powers, the Supreme Court would never attempt to perform that function.