The Basic Philosophy That Courts Should Employ In Deciding Presidential Election Cases-By Harsha Sankar(December 2020)

Even if the courts opined that 50% of the voters and votes were bad, they still cannot disqualify an election. The courts should opine that Dominion Software(used in 28 states) should not have been used and that the officials who allowed it to be used should be subject to criminal prosecution. However, that advisement would not permit the courts to overturn the entire election nor should they.

For example, a referee is bribed to officiate against against a certain team. That referee should be barred and even punished for his actions. However, the results of that sporting event would stand.

Even though the courts cannot invalidate an election, they can still support and apply the law. They can opine and advise that any ballot that does not meet lawful requirements should not be deemed as lawful and therefore should not be counted.

This measure alone would give President Trump the victory. Of course the non-legislative officeholders who unlawfully changed how the elections should have been conducted should be tried for misconduct. If they are found guilty, this court finding would result in impeachment in the state's lower legislative house and then later conviction in the state senate. That conviction would necessitate the removal of that officeholder.