The ECA itself, has no legal grounds under the Constitution. It need be challenged and struck down. The Constitution needs to be amended, to clarify that the VP does in fact, only have a ministerial role in the election certification process. That's what the Framers APPEAR to have intended, but never made that explicitly clear in the text of the Constitution itself, hence the debate over Adams and Jefferson, and still today.
And if it's not SCOTUS' responsibility to deal with electoral disputes, as currently authorized under the Constitution, then the Constitution must be amended to establish a new proceeds for dealing with disputes and who is to do it.
The ECA itself, has no legal grounds under the Constitution. It need be challenged and struck down. The Constitution needs to be amended, to clarify that the VP does in fact, only have a ministerial role in the election certification process. That's what the Framers APPEAR to have intended, but never made that explicitly clear in the text of the Constitution itself, hence the debate over Adams and Jefferson, and still today.
And if it's not SCOTUS' responsibility to deal with electoral disputes, as currently authorized under the Constitution, then the Constitution must be amended to establish a new proceeds for dealing with disputes and who is to do it.