Richard L. Hasen writes:

If [Amy Coney] Barrett does not recuse herself from election disputes next month, there’s every reason to worry that a 5-4 court could interfere in the election to help Trump if a case that might swing the outcome gets before the court.

So why not panic about all of this? Mainly because, as both Jonathan Lai and Greg Sargent explained on Tuesday, the chances of the election being decided by the Supreme Court are very slim. Biden appears comfortably ahead in the polls; it is far from likely that the election would come down to Pennsylvania — or, even if it did, that Pennsylvania will be within the margin that litigation of the election could swing. The result would have to be super close in both the electoral college and popular vote in the state pivotal for the electoral college outcome for a court case to be a plausible way to contest the election. And even then there may be reasons — not the least of which is the legitimacy of the Supreme Court itself and of its newest justice, who already took her seat under circumstances that left Democrats howling — that the court would seek to avoid deciding the outcome of the election. It could instead come down to a resolution of disputes by Congress, which could well be in Democratic hands by the time electoral college votes are counted in January.

Looking beyond this election, though, it is hard to escape the fact that the Supreme Court is poised to allow Republican states to engage in all manner of voter suppression in the name of protecting the rights of state legislatures. This is true not just in election contests but in other cases that raise issues under the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution. That is something to panic about. But perhaps for everyone’s sanity we can put off worrying about that until after we get through the election.