But read the second one. He's saying they could try, but the second amendment would prevent them from doing it, calling it a "restraint on both", "both" meaning Congress and state legislatures.
Now I don't know about you, but my oath said I would support and defend the Constitution, not what some racist/statist federal judges twisted it into. Federal Justices and Judges are not God. They don't have the power to amend the Constitution, not the legitimate power at any rate. It says what it says, and it means what it meant when passed, just as any contract means what it meant when signed. The example was given to illustrate what it meant when it was signed, since this guy was around then, and his opinions were respected enough that his book was the one used to teach Consitutional principals at West Point. The opinions of judges and justices come way down on the list of how to understand the meaning of a Constitutional provision.
No, he's saying the state legislators could try, but the people could appeal to the second amendment to curb "any blind pursuit of inordinate power".
Again, I don't know how successful the people would be (see Morton Grove).