JONATHAN TURLEY: James Talarico’s defense of gun control leaves out a key word

Texas state Rep.James Talarico argues the Second Amendment supports gun control.(Katina Zentz/San Antonio Express-News via Getty Images)

INSIDE TRUMP’S UNPRECEDENTED BATTLE PLAN TO EXPAND SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS THROUGH JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

In the clip, Talarico mocks those who oppose gun control measures and appears not to have taken the time to actually read the Amendment:

Read More → The ‘1776 Diet’: What Americans really ate during the nation’s founding

“A lot of politicians like to talk about the Second Amendment.Very few have actually read the Second Amendment because, if they did, they would know that the words ‘well regulated’ are right there in the text of the amendment itself.”

What he omits is the word following “well regulated”: “militia.”

Read More → DAVID MARCUS: In booming Detroit, voters skeptical of socialism snake oil

It is hardly a long read, so here is the language:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The term “well regulated” was not a reference to regulation in the contemporary sense.It was used to mean orderly or well maintained.

Militias were considered the backbone of the American military, particularly by those who feared a standing army.Some militias were less capable than others during the Revolutionary War.A well-regulated militia meant state militias that were combat-ready.

Read More → Could a paint-on electronic tattoo spot heart attacks?

The individual rightto possess guns was viewed as central to maintaining such militias.However, the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that a “well regulated militia” was not a limitation but a justification for the individual right.

Some states, like Illinois, have enacted firearms legislation that bans the sale and distribution of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.(John J.Kim/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service via Getty Images)

DOJ TARGETS SPANBERGER, NEWSOM GUN LAWS WITH TWIN LAWSUITS AFTER SCOTUS AFFIRMS SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS

Notably, Talarico’s rationale differs from the classic interpretation against reading the Second Amendment as an individual right.Under that construct, it is the word “militia” that conditions the rest of the amendment, stating the purpose of the right to possess firearms.

It is not that the militias are “well regulated,” but rather that possessing guns was protected in order to, and to the extent of, maintaining militias.

Many of us reject that view and believe that the drafters were protecting a long-held and cherished individual right.The reference to the militia was a common rationale or justification for protecting that individual right.

There is an ongoing debate about how drafters interpreted the Second Amendment.(Stock Montage/Stock Montage/Getty Images)

Talarico made the comments in support ofa ban on certaincommonly used guns, such as the AR-15.Notably, those bans will soon be before the Supreme Court after the justices accepted review in Viramontes v.Cook County and Grant v.Higgins.

The grant of certiorari follows the court striking down Hawaii’s “Vampire Law” in Wolford v.Lopez, which barred gun owners withconcealed-carry licensesfrom bringing guns onto private property unless they had explicit permission from the owner.

onelink.me/xLDS?pid=AppArticleLink&af_web_dp=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.

That decision again reaffirms theindividual right under the Second Amendmentand clearly does not embrace Talarico’s “well regulated” rationale for gun control.

  

He is the author of the new book “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution” (Simon &Schuster, Feb 3, 2026), on the 250th anniversary of the American Revolution.on the 250th anniversary of the American Revolution.

He is a nationally recognized legal scholar who has written extensively in areas ranging from constitutional law to legal history to the Supreme Court.He has written over three dozen academic articles that have appeared in a variety of leading law journals.

Professor Turley also served as counsel in some of the most notable cases in the last two decades including the representation of whistleblowers, military personnel, former cabinet members, judges, members of Congress, and a wide range of other clients.

Read More → Lucas Herbert Has 4-Shot Lead On Bryson DeChambeau After Round 2 Of LIV Golf UK

Professor Turley testified more than 50 times before the House and Senate on constitutional and statutory issues, including the Senate confirmation hearings of cabinet members and jurists such as Justice Neil Gorsuch.He also appeared as an expert witness in both the impeachment hearings of President Bill Clinton and Donald Trump.

Professor Turley received his B.A.at the University of Chicago and his J.D.at Northwestern.In 2008, he was given an honorary Doctorate of Law from John Marshall Law School for his contributions to civil liberties and the public interest.