Judge halts Mayor de Blasio’s vaccine mandate for NYPD, other public workers forced to get jab for job

Get the latest BPR news delivered free to your inbox daily. SIGN UP HERE

In a stunning, unexpected move, a New York judge who appears to be a Democrat temporarily halted New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s vaccine mandate for public employees in a ruling issued Tuesday.

The ruling by New York County State Supreme Court Justice Frank P. Nervo is slated to stay in effect until Dec. 14th, when an official hearing will be held so that the vaccine mandate’s opponents may have their day in court.

State records show that Nervo served as a judge on the Civil Court of the City of New York from 2009 to 2018.

Records maintained by the watchdog group Citizens Union further show that he ran for reelection in 2018 as a Democrat:

(Source: Citizens Union)

Tuesday’s order was issued in response to a complaint filed by New York Police Department detective Anthony Marciano, who has refused COVID vaccination on the grounds that he’s “developed and retains a natural immunity to COVID, as demonstrated by recent blood testing,” according to station WABC.

“It is abundantly clear by now that the Vaccination Order is not a limited emergency health measure to prevent the spread of COVID by city employees having significant contact with the public, or by those city workers in contact with a particularly vulnerable population,” his complaint reportedly reads.

“The Vaccination Order applies with equal force to City employees having little or no contact with the public, and does not apply to non-City employees who may have extensive public contact,” it continues.

Nervo appears to believe there’s merit to this argument.

His ruling explicitly orders the mayor, his top officials and their “agents, servants, employees, attorneys, representatives, assignees … from enforcing, ‘ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE TO REQUIRE COVID-19 VACCINATION FOR CITY EMPLOYEES AND CERTAIN CITY CONTRACTORS.'”


However, the mayor’s office responded to the ruling by inexplicably claiming that no, the order doesn’t “block” enforcement of the mandate.

“This is NOT TRUE. The mandate has not been blocked. The Judge has not come to a decision, and won’t until the argument date,” the mayor’s press secretary, Danielle Filson, claimed in a tweet posted late Tuesday.


She appears to be playing a game of semantics. It’s true that the mandate hasn’t been blocked in its entirety yet. However, nobody is claiming that it has.

Nervo’s ruling came a day after the mayor announced yet another vaccine mandate. Set to take effect on Dec. 27th, this one targets all private employees, a move that critics warn will lead to the termination/resignations of countless black and Latino workers.

This mandate is also expected to face a complaint.

“On Tuesday, a Staten Island-based lawyer said he will file a class action lawsuit against the private-sector mandate, on behalf of all unvaccinated workers across the city,” according to WABC.

“We are going to be filing a class action lawsuit, we received dozens of calls yesterday and dozens more today, on behalf of any employee,” attorney Louis Gelormino told the station.

“Anybody that works in NYC that has a job in NYC, this could be from 16 years old to 75 years old, anybody that works in NYC that doesn’t want to get the vaccination, we are going to be filing a class action lawsuit on their behalf,” he added.

Tuesday’s ruling also came alongside a ruling by federal Judge Stan Baker, a Trump appointee, striking down President Joe Biden’s vaccine mandate for federal employees.

“The Court finds that Plaintiffs have a likelihood of proving that Congress, through the language it used, did not clearly authorize the President to issue the kind of mandate contained in EO 14042, as EO 14042 goes far beyond addressing administrative and management issues in order to promote efficiency and economy in procurement and contracting, and instead, in application, works as a regulation of public health, which is not clearly authorized under the Procurement Act 9,” Baker’s ruling reads.

“While the Procurement Act explicitly and unquestionably bestows some authority upon the President, the Court is unconvinced, at this stage of the litigation, that it authorized him to direct the type of actions by agencies that are contained in EO 14042,” it continues.

These rulings suggest that, despite fervent attempts from Democrat politicians to force vaccine mandates down the public’s throat, both Democrat and Republican judges don’t intend to allow that to happen.


Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Vivek Saxena


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

PLEASE JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and great conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-input your email address for this. The public will not see it and we do not share it.

Latest Articles