That's interesting. But even though in practical terms the constitution is being modified like this constantly isn't an amendment technically required to change it?
The argument is the amendment provides the method for removing this stipulation.
But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
The author is saying there are valid arguments that these two Congressional votes, which made the two-thirds threshold were worded in such a way they removed the stipulation for past and future cases.
That's interesting. But even though in practical terms the constitution is being modified like this constantly isn't an amendment technically required to change it?
The argument is the amendment provides the method for removing this stipulation.
The author is saying there are valid arguments that these two Congressional votes, which made the two-thirds threshold were worded in such a way they removed the stipulation for past and future cases.
Oh okay, thanks for clearing that up.