How about this compromise for Michigan and Florida:

[Zynx]

We hold state conventions to determine the allotment of those delegates in which they may, I emphasize may, take the primary vote into consideration, but it will not be a binding factor.

[reality based]

1. Why don't we just let the Supreme Court overturn the election results?

Might as well throw democracy out of the Democratic Party. The people have spoken in those states. Let them have their way.

[Zynx]

2. Party rules are important. However, I suspect the state conventions would not just

flip off their voters because they do have to answer to them after all.

[HopeforChange]

3. You can't change the rules after the game is over and then declare a new winner.

In Michigan Hillary the little sneak left her name on the ballot when the other candidates removed theirs.

So she does not win Michigan. The people were not given an option to select the other candidates.

Fair play in Michigan is to split the delegates between the candidates.

Now in Florida, the candidates did not or were not supposed to campaign so again in all fairness the delegates should be split.

You can't change the rules after the game is over and then declare a new winner.