NYT obviously supports a revisionist Constitution.
But, the question arises - If they didn't really think that it was an absolute right, why would they think that the justices need to modify it to reflect 'modern-day reality'?
It's a living document to them. They of course support the "right" to an abortion, which is found absolutely nowhere in the Constitution but for gun rights that are spelled out in plain English they can't be bothered with. You just know they're longing for the days of the Warren Burger Court.