Yes that's correct.
The issue is the nature of the "adultery" in question. Is it more like Matthew 5:28 adultery, or is it more like 10 commandments adultery?
There are many, many divorced and remarried Catholics with stable second marriages and children. It's difficult to believe that their objective salvation status is the same as a guy hitting a motel with a stripper a couple of times a month (granted, it could still be true. His ways are not our ways).
It's also difficult to believe that the Eastern Orthodox are so far wrong about this as to be participating in a scheme to give communion to thousands and thousands of adulterers.
I bet you that, within a year, the Pope and the bishops are going to come up with some sort of "sacramental economy" scheme to allow communion in certain cases.
After all, many if not most annulments granted in the US are invalid because of perjury. Is it better (in terms of restoring access to the Eucharist) to suborn perjury on a massive scale than to proclaim sacramental economy?
Who is objectively better off?
The man who is weak but acknowledges his sinfulness?
Or the man who refuses to acknowledge that he has actually done something wrong?
It's also difficult to believe that the Eastern Orthodox are so far wrong about this
It is very hard to pin down when exactly this practice of remarriage began in the Eastern churches.
It is unknown in the Eastern rites of the Catholic Church and was never a matter of controversy in the attempts to repair the schism. At the Council of Florence (the 1430s) many fine points of doctrine and morals were discussed by both sides and remarriage wasn't involved.
It seems to be something very new.