Given a Supreme Court that has repeatedly expressed opposition to voting rights and enfranchisement, we have reason to be worried.Whatever law the courts ultimately decide to apply, it won't be the "law of averages". Law doesn't work that way. You can lose 100 different ways, but if you get what you want by winning once, you win. I suspect that's why so many are still so nervous.
Add in that Trump and others have argued repeatedly that the whole point is to get to the Supreme Court because they feel the fix is in despite the strength of their actual claims and that compounds it, especially with the GOP having now made it clear they have no objection to overturning an election if they think it would be successful.
I would. The previous history has been that well argued cases in lower courts do result in recounts, changes to counting rules, and so on.Besides, would anyone expect even the best counsel and best arguments seeking to displace the results of an election to succeed in the lower courts? I wouldn't. SCOTUS will have the last word on these cases, even if to decide not to hear them.
I have not heard of a lower court ever agreeing to "you have to throw out ballots counted for my opponent" though, true.