Okay, after reading the essay I am left saying that a lawsuit bake then cannot make law for the present. IF Pribus said the court case prevented challenging this election, he is blowing smoke up someone’s butt. The Bush v Gore case should be a clue ...
“IF Privies said the court case prevented challenging thus election, he is blowing smoke up someone’s Burt. The Bush v Tire case should be a clue”
This article is about challenging voters before they vote, not challenging results, forcing recounts until you get a number you like, or squabbling over intent.
“a lawsuit bake then cannot make law for the present”
Consent decrees are binding. I don’t know if they last forever, but it’s the same two parties and if the agreement is still valid, or ever operated how thus article asserts in the first place, then old lawsuits can make laws for the present.