Two points about today’s festivities;
For one thing, in at least some states (I don’t know how many) there isn’t any even ceremonial vote by the electors. Here in VA, they are invited to come to Richmond on the appointed day to sign an already prepared certificate of the results. They can sign, or refuse to sign, but either way the same certificate gets sent in.
Even in states that have some sort of ceremonial balloting, it is just ceremonial, by law, and not merely by tradition, as some seem to imagine. Every one of the 51 jurisdictions that get to appoint electors have decided to allow only one type of elector, an elector who votes, in a slate submitted by a party, before election day, and is presented to the voters on election day as an elector who has already chosen one party’s candidate or the other. All states and the District control who gets to run to be an elector, and none allow electors who have not already cast their votes to appear on the ballot on election day.
Maybe some electors today will try to be faithless electors, will tell themselves or the press that they voted for someone other than the candidate they presented themselves to the voters as voting for today. But their votes will only count as they presented themselves on election day. If the number of the faithless is below 37, there may or may not be any litigation over the issue. If it is 37 or above, there certainly will be litigation. It’s hard to imagine that the courts will find that someone who presented his or her self to the voters on election day as having already decided to vote for Trump, will be allowed to have their vote counted differently. To do so, the courts would have to find the system of electors voting before election day unconstitutional. That seems as unlikely as the idea that they would forbid the states from letting voters vote before election day. If you voted early, your vote may very well not be registered until election day. But you’ve already voted, and you don't get to change your vote the day after election day.
But let’s grant for the sake of argument that somehow some conspiracy of electors, state election officials and the courts, lets 37+ faithless EC votes be sent in to Congress, and Trump doesn't have the EC majority he needs to win, or Clinton has a majority. My second point is that in that case, Congress has three different ways it can choose to deal with that eventuality.
One is the way often assumed to be the only possibility, that they could accept the EC votes as submitted and allowed by the courts, with Trump denied a majority (or Clinton the winner!). Clinton is declared the winner, or the choice of president goes to that odd, by-state, vote of the House, with their choices being the top 3 EC vote-getters. They can vote Trump, or Clinton, or whoever got the most votes among those 37+ faithless EC votes. Perhaps some R electors will cast a faithless vote for a less disruptive alternative R to Trump, hoping that the R House would choose that person instead of Trump. But they would have to coordinate that to push this alternative to the front of the faithless vote, and I’m not aware of any such coordinated effort, which, of course, wouldn’t necessarily have to be public.
But the Congress, when it receives the EC votes in that special joint tabulation session, gets to pass on the validity of the tallies of EC votes the states have sent in. The second way that the R majority Congress could deal with 37+ faithless electors having denied Trump the win, would be to simply count all the EC votes as they were represented on election day, leaving Trump the winner. This is presumably what would happen if the faithless 37+ should give Clinton the EC majority
There is also a third way, which has the advantage (to Congress, anyway) of allowing Congress the maximum freedom in dealing with this situation, but also lets it evade responsibility. Congress could decide that it is not competent to sort out what should be done about the faithless electors, and simply not count their votes. No candidate has a majority, but this does not trigger that by-state vote of the House. That only comes in if all the EC votes are counted one way or the other, and no candidate has a majority. But if no candidate has a majority because all the EC votes have not been counted (because some are uncountable), then Congress has to decide itself how to resolve the question of who should be the president. This has only happened once, in 1876.
No matter how bad a situation, it can always get worse. Whatever the outcome in the 51 EC gatherings today, it really, really would not necessarily be the worst outcome if Trump gets a majority. Our side needs to move on from wishful thinking about outcomes that aren’t really even to be wished for, if examined closely enough. This election is lost. We have the next election to win.