In an electoral tie, how would the Senate pick two people for VP if there's a tie for second place?

[Ferguson97]

The Constitution stipulates that if no candidate receives a majority of electoral votes, then the election is sent to Congress. The House picks between the top three candidates for President, and the Senate picks between the top two candidates for Vice President.

What would happen if there were a tie for second place? Suppose there is a really close three way race.

Democratic ticket: 188 electoral votes.
Republican ticket: 175 electoral votes.
Libertarian ticket: 175 electoral votes.

So while the House wouldn't have a problem here since only three candidates received electoral votes at all... what would the Senate do?

They can't vote between the top two recipients, since there is a tie for second place?

What would happen here?

[SInNYC]

The text of the amendment says they pick between the "two highest numbers on the list". My literalist reading of that is to pick between all 3 in this case.

However, the text for the president is a bit more confusing since it says "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three". To me that implies that if there is a tie for 3rd and 4th, the house is free to choose between just the top 2? And its not clear to me whether the "three" modifies persons or numbers.

I'm sure any judge would throw out my reading.

[emailking]

The "not exceeding three" is particularly problematic in a 4 way tie for first, lol.

Probably need a quick Constitutional Amendment if one of these unlikely scenarios ever materializes.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The text of the amendment says they pick between the "two highest numbers on the list". My literalist reading of that is to pick between all 3 in this case.

However, the text for the president is a bit more confusing since it says "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three". To me that implies that if there is a tie for 3rd and 4th, the house is free to choose between just the top 2? And its not clear to me whether the "three" modifies persons or numbers.

I'm sure any judge would throw out my reading.

Your reading would mean that if we had:
Republican: 268
Democrat: 268
Whig: 2

The Senate could theoretically choose the Whig candidate, which clearly isn't what was intended. Yes, the 12th could use clarification.