Supposing Al Gore decides to concede after the recount, does anyone else (i.e. voters who claim they were disenfranchised) have legal standing to sue to overturn the election?
Any one can sue. Whether they have legal standing to maintain the suit is another question. And whether they would prevail is still another question. My off-hand reaction, and this is just a WAG, is don’t hold your breath.
I meant, would the suit be tossed out for lack of legal standing to sue.
Turns out to be a less than relevant question, as Gore does not seem like he has any intention of conceding anytime soon.
They could sue, but even if they won, the remedy ordered by the judge would almost certainly be to just throw out the vote, NOT let them re-vote. There is very little precendent for revotes.
IANAL, but I do watch a lot of them on TV 
Arjuna34
Concession statements are meaningless. They’re just a little “thank you” note at the end of the campaign. Gore would have to actually remounce the Presidency should he win.
In Missouri, our incombent Seantor who lost to the dead guy said “I will not challenge the results and I will not support any challenge.” Sounds to me like he believes there’s an opportunity for someone else out there to still mount a challenge.
I believe the posters are correct when they say that legal standing is required to bring suit.
As far as the OP goes, here’s my WAG:
Premises:
(1) As far as I know, Gore is not a party to the suits that have been brought.
(2) The suits that have been brought are not entirely frivolous.
Conclusion:
Voters have independent standing to challenge elections.
P.S. I don’t know how good premise number 2 is. In these sorts of situations, people bring all kinds of frivolous suits.