Big problem with that: you would have lawsuits out the wazoo because people with early voting would have already voted then a change was made. MANY (including Dems) will say, “No, I wouldn’t have voted for that person.”
I agree AFTER the election you can have this change-—but not in process. So if anyone IS changed out, vote counters would be required to put one set of names in one stack, the next in another, and so on. It would have the impact of a massive third party, not to mention the incredible confusion to (some) voters.
Finally, it’s one thing to go along with replacing a dead candidate. It’s quite another to replace a living one, especially if she doesn’t want to go, especially if VOTES HAVE ALREADY BEEN VOTED. No, I don’t see it happening.
As for a voter saying, "I would have voted differently had the change been in effect when I early voted," it would be the same as if a voter said, "If I had known about this latest scandal, I would have voted differently." Once the vote has been submitted -- early or otherwise -- the vote stands. There is no legal recourse for a pre-scandal ballot or a post-scandal ballot. According to law, your vote is for electors pledged to a party's ticket.
I could see major political issues, but not legal issues. The most I could see is a state legislature intervening to "correct" the names for the slate of party electors.