The remedy for this COUP isn't Hatch. It's Clinton.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

72. The problem there is that right now there's no relevant law or court decision to decide

the constitutionality of. A criminal act or conspiracy related to election tampering would have to be proved; then it would have to be determined that the crime caused the outcome of the election. So until that happens there's no justiciable controversy that a court can hear. So let's say hard evidence is found proving that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians; some statistician can credibly show that the outcome would have been different otherwise; and some group of plaintiff argues that therefore the election results should be overturned. The immediate problem is that there is no existing procedure for doing this.

Further complicating the situation is the fact that almost all election laws are state and not federal. (Recall that Bush v. Gore was a review of a Florida Supreme Court decision related to how recounts are to be done according to Florida law.) So you'd have to convince all the state supreme courts in those states where the vote was close and that had enough EC votes to make a difference. Then the Supreme Court would first have to accept certiorari (which they might not do), and then review the decisions of all of those courts, which probably were based on different interpretations of different laws, and decide whether those courts' decisions were constitutional or not.

If the Supremes finally decides each of those states' results were tainted maybe they could order that the electors of those states must recast their ballots for Clinton. But we are now probably at least two years into the current administration, probably more. I'm not sure what the political consequences of such a long-shot decision would be. But it's both complicated and improbable.