Weren't you the guy quoting constitutional law to us? If the Constitution says the legislators are the legal authority, and it was the executive branch that did the certifying, then clearly the constitutional *REQUIREMENTS* were not met, and the electoral results MUST be sent to the state legislatures.
For those of you who like this sort of nitpicking technicality when it works for what you want, I advise you to feel how comfortable that same shoe fits on your foot.
I can explain how this played out in my own state:
1. Under the state election laws, the voting is required to be carried out according to provisions A, B and C.
2. However, state law gives the governor or Secretary of State the power to do X, Y and Z when a “state of emergency” is declared.
3. X, Y and Z blatantly contradict A, B and C.
4. So we have two conflicting state statutes -- both of which were duly passed by the legislature and signed into law by the governor.
5. The state courts decided in favor of X, Y and Z.
6. When legal challenges were filed in Federal court, the court gave a two-fold response: (A) "There is no basis for a Federal court to overrule a state court in a matter of state law," and (B) "It’s not the job of the Federal courts to fix the conflicting laws passed by your stupid state government."
... and the electoral results MUST be sent to the state legislatures.
So Vice President Pence sends the electoral results back to the legislature of the State of Crapstain on January 6th.
Option 1: The legislature of the State of Crapstain isn't even in session. Does VP Pence send the U.S. military to apprehend them and force them to go into session in the statehouse?
Option 2: The Crapstain legislature IS in session, but refuses to act on the idiocy they've been sent. What happens next?
OK, so Pence or someone else “sends the results to the State Legislatures”
Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Arizona HAVE ALREADY REFUSED TO CONSIDER THE MATTER.
What happens now?