Second Amendment Lawyer Takes on Dexter Taylor Case

I haven’t talked a whole lot about Dexter Taylor in part because I wasn’t really sure what else there was to say. The law he was convicted of breaking was stupid, but it was the law and he broke it. Until or unless the law is overturned, it is what it is.

After his conviction, he has two hopes, one of which is the law being overturned by the courts. The other is a pardon, but that’s not a particularly strong possibility.

So Taylor needs to courts to determine that the law he’s accused of breaking is unconstitutional. He needs a Second Amendment attorney, really.

And it seems he’s got one.

In a high-stakes legal battle, renowned defense attorney Vinoo Varghese of Varghese & Associates, P.C. is fiercely advocating for Second Amendment rights in the landmark Dexter Taylor Case.

The pivotal case, which is set to have a significant impact on the interpretation of New York’s firearm laws, has sparked national attention to the delicate balance between individual rights and state legislation. Varghese, a well-established NY gun rights lawyer, is known for his expertise in defending complex cases. His work on behalf of Dexter Taylor is poised to protect constitutional freedoms guaranteed by the Second Amendment, potentially shaping future legal precedents in gun rights.

The Dexter Taylor case originates from Taylor’s alleged possession of a firearm in a situation that, according to Varghese, falls squarely under Second Amendment protections. With the state bringing substantial charges against Taylor, Varghese’s legal strategy is centered on the argument that his client’s constitutional rights are being infringed upon.

Let’s understand that Taylor was never accused of selling any of the guns he made. He built them for his personal use and personal enjoyment. He just liked making them, which is understandable. They’re pretty freaking cool to build.

He still got 10 years, whereas others accused of much worse crimes got far less time in prison. He’s being made an example of.

But if this case gets overturned, all that changes.

And let’s be real here, nothing he did should be illegal if you look at the Bruen standard. We know definitively that the Founding Fathers had no issue with people building their own guns because people built their own guns regularly during that day. It was a fairly common practice at the time.

The fact that there’s no law means there shouldn’t be a law now. I can’t even imagine an analog that would be close enough even under Rahimi to make that case.

That means that Taylor may well get at least some of New York’s gun control laws overturned. That’s the good news.

The bad news is just how long he’ll have to spend in prison first.

If the goal was to create a situation where the law were to be overturned, then Taylor has cajones far bigger than mine. I’m not interested in risking that long in prison, plus the loss of my gun rights forever, in the hopes that my interpretation of case law is accurate.

I don’t know that Taylor did it for that reason, mind you. I’m only saying that if he did, that took balls.

But what we do know is that a challenge is now ready to kick off and it’s entirely possible that he’ll get the law tossed even if he never intended to.