I will probably regret asking this question, but ... how is it that conservative "originalists" and "textualists" have ignored the "well-regulated militia" part of 2A? Do they have some theory for why that means "unrestricted guns for every individual yahoo"?
Finally got around to reading "To Keep and Bear Arms," by Gary Wills -- fascinating breakdown of 2nd Amendment scholarship & ideas, along with an explanation for how transparent RW bullsh*t triumphed in the courts & public opinion. (h/t @mark_sheridan) https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/09/21/to-keep-and-bear-arms/ …
The story of how an absurd RW take on 2A became the standard is the story of the last-half century of US politics in miniature. Terrible arguments, but repeated endlessly, linked to one another, echoed by RW think tanks & advocacy groups, backed by big $$. Gish gallop writ large.
You can follow @drvox.