As I explained on the other thread, people are reading too much into this. Reassignment was bound to happen soon after ACB was put on the Court. IOW, timing is likely a coincidence.
Also, it is pretty common when significant cases are involved for the justice to refer the matter to the full Court. This is common practice because if a justice denies it, the court’s rules allow petitioner to move on to other justices, and if a justice grants a stay, the loser can ask the full Court to vacate that stay. Since this would waste lots of time and create undue tension among the justices (no one wants to technically overrule his colleague), it makes sense to treat major cases a bit differently and have the full the Court consider the application.
Bottom line: Don’t take this as a sign that the Court is itching to get involved in the election. And in the end, we still need either Kavanaugh or Roberts to be “solid” in order to win, because it’s unlikely that the four more conservative justices will just go off and do their own thing with requests that come from their circuits. At most, they may grant temporary stays until the full court considers or request a response from the other party or something of that nature. They aren’t going to do much on their own.
Do you have an opinion about whether SCOTUS will take a PA case if the results will end up still not giving Trump enough electors.