How does the Catholic Church interpret the section of Nicaea II that Eastern Orthodox interpret as affirming the Council in Trullo?

The Council in Trullo, also called the Quinisext Council, was convened in Constantinople in 692. It did not include any representative from Rome and is not considered an ecumenical council. Canon 13 of the Council in Trullo specifically condemns the Roman practice of requiring clergy to be celibate (either unmarried, or perminantly abstinent following ordination). > if anyone shall have been found worthy to be ordained subdeacon, or deacon, or presbyter, he is by no means to be prohibited from admittance to such a rank, even if he shall live with a lawful wife. Nor shall it be demanded of him at the time of his ordination that he promise to abstain from lawful intercourse with his wife This rule is to be enforced by deposition of the offender > If therefore anyone shall have dared, contrary to the Apostolic Canons, to deprive any of those who are in holy orders, presbyter, or deacon, or subdeacon of cohabitation and intercourse with his lawful wife, let him be deposed. In like manner also if any presbyter or deacon on pretence of piety has dismissed his wife, let him be excluded from communion; and if he persevere in this let him be deposed. As far as I can tell, this is incompatible with the Catholic convention of requiring clergy to be celibate. Furthermore, the Council in Trullo recognized the 85 Apostolic Canons as authoritative, the 85th of which defines a canon for Scripture which is not followed by the Catholic Church because it includes three books of Maccabees, not two. However, Nicaea II, which is recognized as ecumenical by the Catholic Church and therefore authoritative, says in its first canon: > we welcome and embrace the divine Canons, and we corroborate the entire and rigid fiat of them that have been set forth by the renowned Apostles, who were and are trumpets of the Spirit, and those both of the six holy Ecumenical Councils **and of the ones assembled regionally for the purpose of setting forth such edicts,** and of those of our holy Fathers. For all those men, having been guided by the light dawning out of the same Spirit, prescribed rules that are to our best interest. Accordingly, we too anathematize whomsoever they consign to anathema; and we too depose whomsoever they consign to deposition; and we too excommunicate whomsoever they consign to excommunication; and we likewise subject to a penance anyone whom they make liable to a penance. [Emph. added] The Eastern Orthodox Churches take the boldfaced part as an ecumenical endorsement of the Council in Trullo, and thus view it as an authoritative emendation to the fifth and sixth councils. However, the Catholic Church does not (apparently) interpret this canon in the same way, for the reasons outlined above. How do Catholics understand this part of Nicaea II, if they do not take it as acknowledging the authoritative emendations from the Council in Trullo to the fifth and sixth councils?