Use to frame repeal as a contingent political achievement rather than a mechanical verdict on policy performance.
The chapter distinguishes social disillusionment from the mechanism that actually reversed a constitutional amendment.
Thomas R. Pegram argues that dissatisfaction, evasion, corruption, and enforcement weakness did not by themselves make repeal inevitable; durable dry support, proposed enforcement reforms, and constitutional barriers meant that opponents still had to organize a viable political path.
PDF sheet 126
PDF sheet 121
Myth 7 — Why repeal was not automatic
Verified against the sequential extracted-text review and rendered PDF sheets 121–126 on 2026-08-27. Evidence is paraphrased or described; chapter authorship, scope, and corroboration limits are preserved.
Verified atomic evidence from a user-supplied Source. The evidence is stored as a concise paraphrase, table description, or source-claim statement so the knowledge system remains useful without reproducing extended copyrighted text.
Evidence
Use Excerpt Text as the evidence statement and Excerpt Type to distinguish paraphrase, table, and source claim.
Location and context
Locator Start, Locator End, Source Section, and Context identify the rendered PDF passage and prevent the evidence from being detached from the chapter author's argument.
Interpretation boundary
Annotation states the knowledge-system use. Linked Claims must not exceed the passage, and quantitative, legal, causal, comparative, market, or policy statements remain attributed or qualified where required.