# Is Current Second Amendment Jurisprudence Premised Upon a “Misquote”?

- URL: https://talkfuse.com/story/is-current-second-amendment-jurisprudence-premised-upon-a-misquote/
- Published: 2026-11-15T20:30:48+00:00
- Updated: 2026-11-15T21:26:20+00:00
- Original publisher: Reason (publisher lean: Right)
- Original article: https://reason.com/volokh/2026/11/15/is-current-second-amendment-jurisprudence-premised-upon-a-misquote/
- Topics: Politics

## Key points

- Commentary disputes claims that Heller misquoted Blackstone.
- Heller’s citations signal support, not a direct quotation.
- The issue comes as the Supreme Court considers weapons bans.

## Summary

A New York Times article alleges that a key test in the Supreme Court’s 2008 Heller ruling rests on a misquotation of English jurist William Blackstone. This commentary argues that the allegation misreads the ruling’s legal citations, and says the distinction matters as the court prepares to consider assault-weapons bans.

Heller says the historical tradition permits restrictions on “dangerous and unusual weapons”, while Blackstone wrote “dangerous or unusual”. The article points out that Blackstone is cited with a “See” signal, which indicates supporting material rather than a direct quotation, and that the cited authorities are listed chronologically. It also reports that former Scalia clerk John Bash says he explained this citation point to one of the Times reporters before publication.

---
Summarised by TalkFuse (https://talkfuse.com/). Quote the original publisher for the reporting and link this page for the summary and discussion.