Covid Felony – Democrats Want Jail For Dissenters

In a recent turn of events that underscores the ongoing misuse of judicial resources to perpetuate pandemic-era control, New York State Supreme Court Justice Brandon T. Lantry took a decisive stand by dismissing felony charges against two individuals accused of buying fake COVID-19 vaccine cards. This case, initially propelled by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, sought to penalize J.O. and R.V. for their alleged attempt to navigate around New York City’s vaccine mandates—a clear reflection of the Democratic push to extend pandemic restrictions into the realm of personal freedom.

Manhattan DA Bragg, in a move that has raised eyebrows, chose to levy felony charges against these individuals for purchasing counterfeit vaccine documentation from a New Jersey source. This decision came as part of a broader crackdown on approximately 100 people linked to the same scheme. However, Justice Lantry’s intervention highlighted a glaring inconsistency in Bragg’s prosecutorial stance. Despite Bragg’s office routinely dismissing or reducing charges for far more severe crimes, including violent felonies and drug offenses, it seemed overly zealous in pursuing those who sought to sidestep the city’s vaccine requirements.

The dismissal of these charges by Justice Lantry isn’t just a legal ruling; it’s a beacon of rationality pushing back against what many see as an Orwellian overreach by Democratic officials. Critics have pointed out the absurdity of pursuing these cases with such vigor while more serious crimes are met with leniency. Radio host Buck Sexton and commentator Monica Crowley have vocally criticized Bragg’s misplaced priorities, accusing him of using his office to further a political agenda under the guise of public health.

This situation paints a stark picture of how pandemic measures have been weaponized to exert control and enforce compliance, sidelining common sense and proportionality in the legal process. The pursuit of individuals over fake vaccine cards, years after the height of the pandemic, speaks volumes about the lengths to which certain officials will go to maintain a grip on the narrative of fear and compliance, even as the world moves forward.

The dismissal serves as a critical reminder of the need to guard against the overreach of authority, especially when it encroaches on individual liberties and uses the legal system as a tool for political ends. As society navigates the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s imperative to question and hold accountable those actions that seem more rooted in controlling behavior than in serving justice or public health.