Bush v Gore setting precedent afterall?

Although the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Bush v. Gore that “Our consideration is limited to the present circumstances for the problem of equal protection in election processes generally presents many complexities,” it was used in the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in Cincinnati, and was a key talking point in Minnesota Supreme Court’s consideration of the Norm Coleman/Al Franken recount litigation. (full article)

I guess the one-time-only carries no weight...but I am more disturbed by the fact that recounting votes to ensure accuracy allegedly violates the equal protection clause, because "by later arbitrary and disparate treatment" one person's vote is valued over another.

Rather, it seems to me that the equal protection clause is violated when reasonable evidence that clearly indicates a false outcome within the results of a certain voting bloc is ignored.