“`html
![Congress Joint Session Image](https://www.hindustantimes.com/ht-img/img/2025/01/04/1600x900/US-POLITICS-TRUMP-16_1734906087911_1736003918157.jpg)
Fact Check Analysis: Congressional Certification of Donald Trump’s Electoral College Victory
One of our dedicated subscribers submitted this request for a deeper investigation into the article titled “How Congress will certify Donald Trump’s Electoral College victory on January 6,” which was published by Shweta Kukreti on January 4, 2025. Subscribers like you can submit fact-check requests for free, and we at DBUNK are committed to delivering the truth.
The full article can be accessed here: Original Article on Hindustan Times.
Misinformation Detected in the Article
Upon reviewing the contents of the article, we found instances of misinformation, missing context, and subtle misrepresentation that could mislead readers. Given the public’s concern about electoral processes and controversies, it is critical to separate fact from fiction.
Does Kamala Harris Truly Have a Role in Objecting?
While the article correctly states that Kamala Harris, as Vice President, will preside over the certification session, it neglects to explicitly clarify her constitutional limitations. The updated Electoral Count Act of 2022, which was mentioned in the article, explicitly limits the Vice President’s role to a ceremonial one. Harris does not have the authority to unilaterally object to or alter the results, nor could her actions “disrupt” the process in a significant way, as implied by the question posed in the article. The omission of this key detail leaves readers wondering if Harris could influence the outcome, which is not possible under the clarified law.
![Stay Informed Against Fake News](https://dbunk.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/img_1.jpeg)
Historical Comparisons: Misleading or Overstated?
The article references past certifications, such as Al Gore presiding over his own loss in 2001 and Mike Pence during the tumultuous 2021 session. While these examples are factually accurate, the article creates a subtle equivalency between January 6, 2021, and the upcoming certification by focusing on the dramatic nature of the previous event. This emphasis risks sensationalizing the calm and routine proceedings expected in 2025, which could misrepresent the stability of the current situation. Readers should note that while objections may occur, the legal and procedural updates since 2021 make disruptions significantly less likely.
Electoral Margin Misrepresented
The article states Donald Trump won the 2024 election with an “electoral win over Harris that was decisive, 312-226.” However, this claim requires further vetting. While unofficial reports confirm Trump had a significant margin, official certification reports for electoral results should be referenced explicitly to ensure accuracy. Without citing a named official source, the claim remains unverified and speculative within the context of this article.
![DBUNK Provides Clarity](https://dbunk.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/336022377_6299001267390_5012139063969180578_n-2.jpeg)
User Question: Could Harris or Others Object and Cause Delays?
If objections arise during the certification process, the current procedural rules under the revised Electoral Count Act of 2022 determine what happens next. For an objection to suspend proceedings and force separate votes in both chambers, it must be signed by one-fifth of the members from each chamber of Congress. This raised threshold minimizes chances of objections causing delays unless widespread bipartisan support exists. Importantly, no Vice President—including Harris—can unilaterally delay or manipulate the results.
In 2021, objections were considered but defeated due to a lack of widespread Congressional support. Similarly, if objections arise in 2025, they would likely be dismissed quickly unless presenting strong evidence agreed upon by both chambers—an unlikely scenario given historical precedent.
![Fight Against Misinformation](https://dbunk.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/3c5f3417-3215-4526-9b88-1aba6e9fc1b9.jpg)
Final Takeaway
The article’s reliance on historical parallels and lack of clear, explicit context creates room for confusion among readers. While its basic explanation of the process is accurate, subtle gaps in context—like whether Kamala Harris could interfere or the exact validity of Trump’s electoral margin—could mislead the audience. DBUNK recommends viewers critically assess such coverage and rely on fact-checking platforms like ours to uncover the full truth.
Stay empowered against misinformation. Our new DBUNK App is launching soon! Download and join our mission to seek clarity in today’s media landscape.
“`