No, it could be mutable variable referenced/accessed (not sure of the right word here) in a function via either a reference-to-const or a pointer-to-const.
It seems highly non-intuitive to me that casting away constness works differently depending on whether the variable was defined const or not, but if that's the rules, that's the rules.
P.S. if you downvoted to disagree with this (on my parent post), please provide an opposite example, because as a C programmer, I would really be interested to be proven wrong on this matter.