1) SCOTUS cannot reverse a state supreme court on an issue of state law. The argument is that under PA state law, laches can't bar consideration of a constitutional challenge under the PA constitution. That's a pure question of state law. SCOTUS has no say

2) Separately from that, he's wrong about what the precedent was. Even under Stilip, laches wouldn't bar a challenge to applying the law *going forward* but it absolutely would bar a challenge to election results from elections *already held* under the challenged law.

3) Even if none of that were true, it is literally impossible for a State Supreme Court to "wrongly not follow its own precedents". State Supreme Courts - like the US Supreme Court - have the ability to overrule their prior decisions and say "the law is different moving foward"