The 14th Amendment can still kick in on January 6, 2025. [This is my comment that I keep making, not Keith speaking here.]
This is what should happen then:
Several members of Congress are appointed “tellers,” who will read the slates and keep the official running total of electoral votes each candidate receives. Then, proceeding alphabetically, one of the tellers will announce something along the lines of:
- Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of X seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Y received N votes for President and Z received N votes for Vice President.
The key word is “regular” and the related phrase “regularly given.” This actually deals with a single elector's vote, that the vote has been cast pursuant to law, with “law” referring to the federal Constitution, federal law, and state law.
And that of course includes the 14th Amendment.
So, if one or more of the electors were to vote for an ineligible candidate, the slate would not be “regularly given.” That means that that elector’s vote will be nullified and not count towards the total.
This is all before any other member of Congress is given the chance to object to the slate. It is automatic and is supposed to be caught by the tellers.
The first time this happens, it is likely that the debate which normally arises after an objection will occur at this moment in the process. The rules will be a little different, though. Instead of a simple majority, the purpose will now be to determine whether the 14th Amendment is to be overridden by a two-thirds majority. And this decision should apply to any further slates that are encountered, so that it doesn't have to be repeated.