After reading commentary on the implausibility of rendering a U.S. presidential election void (and the post, Is it possible to rig the American presidential elections?), I have a question. Considering the fact that the 1887 Electoral Count Act generally gives power to individual states to determine disputed election results, what would be the point of a candidate contesting a particular state’s election? Even in a close race, if a candidate this week successfully challenges a state’s election results (such as proof of vote fraud), would the U.S. Supreme Court intervene?
Possibly. One could argue to the Supreme Court that something a State was doing regarding their election results violated some Federally protected right of its citizens. For example, in the 2000 election, the Florida recount was challenged at the Supreme Court which decided that the proposed recount violated the Constitutionally-guaranteed right of equal protection.