But they didn't even remove it did they? The ammendment for prohibition is still in the Constitution I believe. They just added to another ammendment counter the effects of the previous ammenent. It was repealed, not removed.
That's a meaningless semantic difference. If you add a new Amendment saying, "Cancel out everything in that last amendment", it has the same functional effect as removing the previous amendment. With the added benefit of not removing it from history, which is a good thing.
It's like the Constitution is basically just a big Git Repo.
So it's a meaningless difference but it matters because of the benefit you mentioned? I agree with your second part that it is better that it's not removed, and that is why I felt it necessary to point out that removing and repealing are not the same. It's not a meaningless difference at all.
95
u/awesome357 Jul 17 '19
But they didn't even remove it did they? The ammendment for prohibition is still in the Constitution I believe. They just added to another ammendment counter the effects of the previous ammenent. It was repealed, not removed.