You are talking gobbledegook. Either the pope is commenting on a latae sententiae and merely giving an opinion about what it meant--which is my view--or he is judicially declaring a sentence of excommunication--which is your view. If he is commenting on a latae sententiae--then it is a matter "in formo interno"--literally, in the internal forum of the individual involved and CANNOT be known by anybody else.
You are trying to say at one and the same time it is a public matter but it is also a latae sententiae decree--which is ridiculous. Of course the consecrations were a public matter--but the MOTIVE for the consecrations resided in the hearts of the individuals involved. It is the motive for the action that matters, not the fact of it. If the motive was to protect the faith and avoid harm to souls, there could be no penalty according to Canon Law.
It was the public act alone which the Pope attempted--wrongly--to interpret. He judged the consecrations took place in order to deny his papacy; he judged wrongly and falsely. You won't concede this because you are reluctant to admit the Pope has erred. Nevertheless, those he accused were innocent of what he charged and certainly might in good conscience ignore such false accusations of excommunication or schism.