I would not put it past a bunch of judges to say that the Amendment is unconstitutional because it conflicts with "core" equal protection clause in the 5th amendment or because it contravenes the "penumbras and emanations" of the Constitution.
There have already been cases where judges interpret the law as X. legislature and governor pass alaw saying that the specific law is not x but rather Y, and judges refuse to respect the legislative will.
'Checks & balances' can be applied politically to "rogue courts"..
This is not being done because politicians are ignoring their oaths.