The New York Supreme Court has raised concerns over the aggressive prosecution tactics employed by New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg in cases involving fake COVID vaccine cards. Bragg had been pursuing charges against individuals who violated the city's vaccine mandate by using fraudulent vaccination cards. However, the court dismissed felony charges against two employees who had contested the charges, stating that their actions did not rise to the level of serious crimes.
Bragg's approach to prosecuting vaccine dodgers has drawn criticism, especially when compared to his leniency towards suspects accused of more serious crimes such as murder, theft, and drug charges. The court found it peculiar that Bragg would prioritize these minor offenses while ignoring more significant cases.
Justice Brendan T. Lantry, who delivered the ruling, expressed astonishment at the cases that Bragg's office chooses to ignore. He highlighted how Bragg routinely moves to dismiss serious counts or entire indictments in the interests of justice, often months or even years after the 45-day period for dismissal has expired. This inconsistency in prioritizing cases has raised eyebrows and led to questions about Bragg's approach to prosecuting crimes.
The ruling by the Supreme Court was welcomed by Republican City Council Minority Leader Joseph Borelli, who criticized Bragg for prosecuting individuals who obtained fake vaccination cards out of fear of government action. Borelli accused Bragg of being more focused on minor offenses rather than addressing violent criminals. The recent release of several illegal immigrants who attacked New York City police officers further highlighted the allegations against Bragg's office.
While the Supreme Court does not typically involve itself in cases related to fake vaccine cards, this ruling serves as a reminder of the importance of fair and consistent prosecution. Justice Lantry dismissed the felony charges against the two individuals, emphasizing that their actions were not among the most serious crimes and did not warrant such harsh treatment.
