Some imprecise terminology being thrown about right now that appears to overstate Congress's role Jan. 6. Congress does not "certify" the presidential election results. It "counts" them. There's a difference. Quick thread.

States held popular elections for the selection of presidential electors Nov. 3. After *state* official certified the election, they filed certificates of ascertainment with the Archivist about which electors received how many votes. You can see them here: https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/2020

Then electors, who had been elected pursuant to that ascertainment, met Dec. 14. They voted, "certify" the results under the Twelfth Amendment, & send certificates of the vote to Congress. Twelfth Amendment text here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxii

Congress's power under the Twelfth Amendment, in contrast, is that "the votes shall then be counted." Congressional precedent allows Congress to decide whether to count the votes under circumstances, but it does not "certify" anything.

Congress, for instance, might conclude that the votes were not "regularly given." But the Electoral Count Act anticipates that the results certified by the executive of a state are "regularly given": https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/15

Congress has counted every single electoral vote cast since 1872. Refusal to count is a significant act, because it effectively strips a state of representation in the Electoral College, & it rejects the state's legal apparatus that certified the election results. /end

As an addendum, members of Congress don't "contest" the election (which could have happened by *presidential candidates* in the *states*). Members of Congress object to the counting of electoral votes. https://twitter.com/WLOS_13/status/1341503784984330241