Orders by New York judges — one in the Bronx and one in Manhattan — that two defendants appearing in their courts get vaccinated raise important questions about the line between civic responsibility and civil liberties, legal observers say, though neither defendant appeared to object.
A number of experts who reviewed the orders disagreed as to whether they were justified, or whether one or both could represent an overstep — a debate that underscores the legal and ethical complications that have emerged around vaccination requirements.
In one case, Judge Jeffrey Zimmerman, 61, of the Bronx County criminal court, explained that the defendant, William Gregory, had been accused of crimes — including drug possession, criminal trespass, shoplifting and criminal contempt — that showed he had placed his own interest above others’. In getting the vaccine, the judge argued, Mr. Gregory would be doing the opposite, and so vaccination would represent a form of rehabilitation.
The second order came from a federal judge in Manhattan, Jed S. Rakoff, who granted the release of a defendant, Elouisa Pimental, who was charged with conspiracy to distribute fentanyl, on the condition that she get vaccinated.