“entire Constitution would be dispensed with “in a purely technical way”, and I pray that never happens”
I disagree with you.
The “technical” part of the law is where every argument originates. Thats why lawyers make the big bucks. Every law is open to litigation, meritorious or not. How many times has a criminal been freed because of a “technicality”?
The left uses technicality of the law every challenge it makes. The ACLU don’t exist because of cut and dried law. Every challenge they sue for is based on interpretation of the technical fine points in law.
I think you missed the point of my post, which was in reply to expatguy. I was using the word in the sense it was used in the post to which I was replying.
Expatguy’s use of the word “technical” was meant to minimize and trivialize the Constitutional requirements for eligibility for President. I actually agree with you; these “technicalities” are crucial.