[AndrewC]

During the hearing to determine incapacity. If you want that to carry over beyond that, you need to change the law.

Nope. That was not the argument made by the 11th. Try again.

[general_re]

The Constitution does state a rigorous limit for advice and consent concerning treaties here...

And what's the "rigorous limit" for judicial appointments? Shall we follow the argument you appear to be developing and assume it's also 2/3'rds? After all, if it says "2/3'rds" in one place, but doesn't specify somewhere else, that somewhere else must also really mean 2/3'rds. Maybe we can even say that "the concept still applies", right?

That was not the argument made by the 11th.

What, am I not permitted to share my own opinions as well?