Lots. Anything involving standing at the least, but also many of the “unauthorized people changed the rules without the authority of the state legislature”.
You’ll find similar lists on Wikipedia and at the American Bar Association; they slant their interpretations differently than I do here. Look into a couple of the “standing” or “no merit” cases and see if you really think they were without merit or that there was no “case or controversy” as defined in the Constitution.
Yes, a couple were kooky, particularly around voting machines, but most were “you changed the rules in a way that weakens election security and you are not Constitutionally allowed to do that, since you aren’t the state legislature and the written law is at odds with your rules”.
So I did go ahead and read over the first on your list, claims, Pennsylvania supreme Court ruling, and the district court ruling (super fun reading) and yeah... Not convinced. I won't attempt to summarize everything here because it's a grab bag, which is common with all these election cases. Throw a bunch of shit at the wall and hope something sticks. The claims pretty much boil down to X common practice (including many that are common in my state of Idaho, ex mail in ballots, drop boxes, which, weird, no challenges) could lead to fraud and are therefore unconstitutional, under some fuzzily spelled out mechanizm, and we are entitled to ??? (Seriously, no clear cut relief was spelled out for most claims, which is generally a requirement).
Now sure, maybe this is one of the "kooky" ones, but then we are back to, which ones? "Here's a list of 100 cases, read them all" isnt a reasonable ask. Getting a handle on this one was a significant (wasted) time investment. One which I already wasted significant amounts of time on back in 2020-2021.
You claim "most" did not get a fair hearing. It shouldn't be hard to pick one and clearly explain what was unfair about it.
Which ones?