Hey, Ratskin: It was not an insurrection, regardless how bad you want it to be. Donald Trump’s own words that day prove it.
The VP will preside over the electoral college.
The "Algore" argument that will almost certainly--yet surprisingly--come out is that "There is no controlling legal authority" Constitutionally empowered to weigh or counter any action taken by the presider of the electoral college.
The Constitution does not specify a controlling legal authority, despite interpretations otherwise that will be offered, yet that to many will only appear to offset the squishy claim that PDJT committed an insurrection.
Let's recall that Proud Boys Leader Enrique Tarrio Says DOJ told him to lie to frame PDJT.
"What VP Kamala says goes!" without SCOTUS' authority to intervene, they will say. And gee, what kind of rulings could she come up with for that moment?
And.... will there be a different VP by that time?
For the larger picture, however, if a clear majority of the voting populace seem to side with SCOTUS having the final say in the matter, SCOTUS could rule that there has been overwhelming election interference from many quarters (likely including foreign interference), thus tossing any further such interference from the (obviously biased) VP in the electoral college.
Such a move is obviously calculated by Ratskin to occasion all manner of violence, which the Ratskin crowd will blame on Proud Boys and those (Leftists) sporting MAGA gear.