If a state isn't certified by the Electoral College, isn't one option to subtract that state's EVs from the total of 538, producing a lower 50% mark to win the election?
I don’t think that is the case.
It has nothing to do with an “option.” The scenario you posted seems to be exactly what the 12th Amendment says would be done in a scenario where any states don’t certify their electoral votes by December 19th.
If the re-count isn't finished in time to meet the deadline for certification (Dec 13), the state legislatures are empowered to appoint their own slate of electors. These electors would attend the Electoral College and cast their votes on Dec 19.
Republicans control both houses of the Wisconsin, Michigan an Pennsylvania legislatures. In all liklihood, they would re-appoint the current slate of Trump electors.
No state is going to lose their EC votes. Trump is going to receive every one of the 306 EV he earned.
270 is NOT the number. The number is a majority of the electors actually appointed.
“If a state isn’t certified by the Electoral College, isn’t one option to subtract that state’s EVs from the total of 538, producing a lower 50% mark to win the election?”
That is an open question and not clearly spelled out in the USC. It depends on what the term “ appointed” electors means The question arose in 2000 when there was a possibility that Florida’s EVs would be lost. At that time Bush’s legal team ( Ed Meese among them) argued that 270 is a fixed number and Gore needed FLA ( and 270+) or the election went to Congress for resolution.