Experts predict the Supreme Court will likely remain beyond the 2024 presidential election

Election lawyers and experts say the U.S. Supreme Court is unlikely to take up an election-related case after Nov. 5, let alone cast a deciding vote.

“It has to be very, very close,” Jason Torchinsky, a partner at Holtzman Vogel, told Fox News Digital. “If you look at the history of post-election disputes, the only places where they effectively determined the outcome were actually those where the vote count was very close.”

“If there is a real issue, the Court will address it. If it’s something that the Court doesn’t think deserves attention at a higher level, it will acknowledge it briefly,” Torchinsky said.

Congress changed the 2022 Electoral Counting Reform Act (ECRA), which expedites potential litigation and specifies that the vice president’s role during the joint session is “ministerial in nature.”

‘IDEOLOGICAL BALANCE’: SUPREME COURT CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY REMAINS NO MATTER WHO WINS THE ELECTION, EXPERTS SAY

The statute says: “any complaint filed by an aggrieved candidate for President or Vice-President” will be considered by a district court composed of three judges. Therefore, “the court’s duty is to complete the case files and resolve the claim as quickly as possible.”

HARRIS ASKS QUESTION ABOUT SUPREME COURT PACKING DURING RALLY, SUPPORTS ‘WHAT KIND OF REFORM’

The parties may then directly request the Commission to reconsider the decision United States Supreme Court in accelerated mode.

“This in some ways opens up a new avenue to federal court for a specific, limited set of issues raised under the Voting Counts Act,” said Greg Teufle, founder of OGC Law. “However, very limited issues can be raised under this Act. “So this is not a broad expansion or increase in the likelihood of litigation, either in federal courts or litigation reaching the U.S. Supreme Court under the Election Reform Act.”

Teufle noted that for the Court to take up an election issue, “there would have to be significant and provable allegations of fraud or other serious violations of law in the way elections were conducted or votes were processed.”

Republicans and Democrats likewise, they launched a flurry of election-related lawsuits before November 5, including a recent case in Georgia that held that county election officials must certify results within a legal deadline despite suspicions of fraud or errors.

Joseph Burns, a partner at Holtzman Vogel, noticed this Republicans can prove it succeed in election disputes based on the composition of the Court.

“In terms of the composition of the court, there is no question that we have six judges appointed by the Republican Party right now,” Burns said. “And these are generally the people who I think will interpret what needs to be interpreted, whether it’s a state statute or a federal statute. Their general philosophy is to adhere as closely as possible to the words of the statute.”

“The Supreme Court is more conservative in this regard,” Burns continued. “And certainly Republicans generally make these types of arguments about, for example, courts more stringently interpreting statutes or state constitutions. So I think in that respect, given the arguments presented by each side overall, Republicans would be in a better position.”

ANONYMOUS GOP SENATOR CONCERNED ABOUT GRASSLEY, 91, REGAINING KEY JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: REPORT

However, John Hardin Young, general counsel at Sandler Reiff, told Fox News Digital that he believed it was very unlikely that the Supreme Court would be able to decide the 2024 election, especially given the conservative majority.

“I think the nine justices are showing sensitivity right now to not get involved in a case unless it’s absolutely necessary,” Young said. “I think a majority on the Supreme Court is willing to get involved in a case if they think the process is corrupt or if there are people who are not following the rules because I think the majority is very sensitive to democracy depending on the people following the rules.”

“There are so many unknowns that we have to see how things play out,” said Jeff Weiss, a professor at New York Law School.

Although ECRA attempted to clarify and change the way electoral votes are cast and counted, Teufle stated that the entire law could become subject of the dispute after November 5.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“The entire act could be challenged if it is used to influence the outcome of the election in a way that people consider improper, unfair or illegal,” Teufle said. “Any party disappointed with the way the votes were counted may raise constitutional questions about the applicable regulations and the vote counting process.”