the election process

More accurately, the counting process, a process set by 3 USC, statutory law that to a significant degree, is unconstitutional. Congress has no constitutional authority to insert itself into any Electoral adjudication matters.

Pence needed to refuse to certify the election

Where in the Constitution, is the President of the Senate explicitly authorized with this alleged power to "certify" the count of the Electoral votes, let alone judge as to the legitimate appointment of said Electors?

That issue, the validity of the state appointed electors, was never considered by the senate,

Where in the Constitution, is the Senate explicitly authorized to "consider" the "validity" of the state appointed Electors?

And you are also correct in that this specific matter was a case that needed to be addressed by the SCOTUS.

That's a BINGO. So let's focus on that actual issue, as opposed to wasting time on arguments in sophistry.

When the senate rules committee invented a loophole to insert themselves into the election process (do your homework if you don't know what I mean)

Here's some better homework, research how Congress invented a power that the Constitution never authorized, to insert itself into the Electoral adjudication process. Start in the 1862 and work your way through 1876, the ECA, and the codification of that statute. "Senate rules loopholes" are peanuts. Go for the big fish, e.g. the unconstitutional intrusion of the entire Legislative body into the realm of the Judiciary.

Mike Pence had a constitutional duty to protect the constitution

And he has the constitutional duty to not violate the Constitution. Violating the Constitution, to protect it, is still a violation of the Constitution. How we win matters, and violating the Constitution to save it, was not the way, especially when there were and are still several constitutionally sound remedies yet to be exercised.

He needed to stop the certification,

You mean, the COUNT of the Electoral votes. Again, there is no "certification" power explicitly authorized by the Constitution, not to the POTS, not to Congress. Yes, it's a glaring flaw of the Constitution, but alas, it's there. We can't just imagine in a fix that isn't there.

and force the SCOTUS to rule on the constitutionality of the senate rules change.

Trump could have filed a direct challenge to SCOTUS anytime, just as Bush did in 2000. Technically, he didn't. But he still could. And yet, he hasn't. Why is that? And again, this "Senate rules change" is a deadend argument. The real argument is over the unlawful actions of state governments to appoint Electors as "winners" of elections that were unconstitutionally run. That's the whole enchilada.

He did not, thus violating his oath of office, and allowing Joseph Robinette Biden to become an illegally installed POTUS

Donald J. Trump was the lawful President of the United States of America, clothed with immense power. He was the Commander-in-Chief of the greatest military on earth, whose duty was to enforce federal law and the US Constitution, and to suppress the insurrection and rebellion that occurred in 2020. And yet, the Resident was allowed to occupy the WH. Where was Trump? If you're going to apply this standard against Pence, why not Trump, especially given his exponentially greater power as POTUS as Rome was left burning (at least, from what we saw). Come, let us reason together. You're Longstreeting Pence to Leeionize Trump.

I like to think, and hope that it's true, that there was more going on behind the curtain with Trump and Pence making the hard decisions to sacrifice the Alamo in order to win Texas (not a big fan of the politics that pushed that domino, but I digress...). Still waiting for that grand reveal. It's been 2 years and popcorn is getting too expensive.