Take the following as truth: We have in some cases stated that when an excepting proviso is found unconstitutional the substantive provisions which it qualifies cannot stand, for to hold otherwise would be to extend the scope of the law . . . so as to embrace [situations] which the legislature passing the statute had, by its very terms, expressly excluded.
Then the following statement: "We have said that when a proviso is unconstitutional, the provisions it qualifies can still stand." is true, false, or inconclusive?
Answer: False