Apparently some states are enacting legislation to ensure that votes postmarked on or before 2 November will be counted. This could mean that the election result may not be known for some time.
SCOTUS appointments are for life and as a consequence
there is no obligation for the judges to act as political flunkies. Even Kavenaugh has voted against Trump on some matters.
So while the vote of ultra conservative judges on matters such as abortion maybe taken for granted, how these judges vote on matters relating to the orderly conduct of the Constitution (and elections as intended by the Constitution) is another matter.
I assume SCOTUS will note the common law benchmark in Commonwealth countries called the "postal rule". That rule means that in contracts the conduct of things like elections a respondant can rely on the orderly and timely conduct of the post office and cannot be penalised should there be a disruption to the post.
Now while SCOTUS is not bound to British styled common law, they will accept that the Constitution was drafted around such presumptions and such intent.
USPostal Rule Definition: A rule of contract law that makes an exception to the general rule that an acceptance is only created when communicated directly to the offeror. An acceptance is binding and the contract is said to be perfected when the acceptor places this acceptance in the mail box for return mail even if, in fact, it never reaches the offeror.
In the US my understanding is that the Postal Rule applies to contracts only but SCOTUS will consider applicability of the principle in terms of the outcome of orderly elections as intended by the Constitution.
Should Trump (or anyone else) act illegally by destroying votes, SCOTUS will determine that election to be void and Nancy Pelosi will become President on 20 January. Pelosi will remain in that position until another vote is called and tallied (at huge expense).
