Cruise Passenger Accuses RFK Jr. of Holding Her «Hostage» Despite Clearance to Go Home

A dispute over federal quarantine powers has thrust one Florida woman into the center of a growing public health controversy after she accused Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of keeping her «hostage» despite recommendations that she could complete her monitoring at home. Angela Perryman, who was among passengers exposed during a cruise ship hantavirus outbreak, says she has become trapped in a battle between federal and state authorities. While government officials insist continued confinement is necessary to protect public health, Perryman argues that no clear scientific justification has been provided, raising new questions about individual rights, federal authority and the limits of quarantine measures in the United States.

Perryman was among 18 American passengers monitored after traveling aboard the cruise ship linked to the hantavirus outbreak before returning to the United States in May. Following her arrival, she was transferred to the National Quarantine Unit at Nebraska Medical Center, one of the country’s specialized facilities for handling high-risk infectious disease cases. Federal authorities initially imposed a 42-day quarantine period on affected passengers while health officials evaluated potential risks associated with the outbreak.

Speaking to CNN from the Nebraska facility, Perryman described her situation in unusually blunt terms. She argued that the dispute over her release has less to do with medical concerns than disagreements between government agencies. Explaining how she views the situation, Perryman said she believes she is caught in «a state-federal spat» and added that «and I’m just a hostage.» Her comments quickly attracted attention as critics questioned whether federal authorities were applying quarantine rules consistently.

The controversy intensified because not all passengers were treated the same way. While some of the 18 Americans voluntarily remained at the Nebraska facility for the entire quarantine period, most were eventually allowed to complete the remainder of their monitoring from home. Those arrangements typically involved coordination between federal health officials and state public health agencies responsible for local monitoring and emergency medical planning.

According to Perryman, doctors involved in her care informed her that she could safely continue quarantine from her Florida residence. She says medical experts indicated that her release could proceed if the Florida Department of Health agreed to assume responsibility for monitoring her condition and established a contingency plan should hospitalization become necessary. Perryman argues those requirements were met and that there was no medical reason to continue keeping her at the federal facility.

Originally, Perryman expected her quarantine to end on May 31. However, according to reports, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention later extended the order through June 21. The extension surprised Perryman and further complicated efforts to arrange her return home. The decision effectively prolonged her confinement by several additional weeks beyond what she initially anticipated when she entered the federal quarantine system.

The situation escalated when Kennedy personally signed an order requiring Perryman to remain in federal quarantine. In the written determination, he concluded that «continuation of the order is necessary to protect public health.» Kennedy further wrote: «Having considered the medical reviewer’s findings and recommendation and the evidence in the administrative record, I find that the requirements for Federal quarantine continue to be met.» The decision ensured that Perryman would remain at the Nebraska facility despite ongoing discussions regarding home monitoring.

The Department of Health and Human Services has maintained that the issue is not whether Perryman feels healthy but whether adequate safeguards exist for monitoring her outside the facility. According to federal officials, concerns emerged regarding Florida’s proposed oversight plan. An HHS spokesperson stated: «In the absence of proper home monitoring by state authorities» the quarantine order remained necessary. Officials insist that federal law requires them to prioritize public safety whenever uncertainties remain.

Federal authorities have emphasized that the quarantine order is designed to protect both Perryman and the broader public. Explaining the rationale behind the decision, the HHS spokesperson added that «the Administration’s quarantine order is necessary to ensure both Ms. Perryman’s and her community’s wellbeing.» The statement reflects the administration’s position that continued restrictions are justified until officials are fully satisfied with monitoring arrangements outside federal custody.

Perryman has repeatedly challenged the government’s explanation, arguing that officials have failed to clearly explain why her continued confinement advances public health objectives. Reflecting on the situation, she said: «If it had been from the beginning that ‘this is the reason that we need to do this, and there is an actual scientific justification,’ then that would have been OK.» She added: «If there was a scientific reason for this, if I could see that, yes, this actually does further public health, I would have agreed.» Her criticism centers on what she views as a lack of transparency.

As Perryman remains confined pending the expiration of her quarantine order, her case has become a focal point in a larger debate over federal authority during public health emergencies. Supporters of the government’s actions argue that caution is necessary when dealing with potentially dangerous infectious diseases. Critics counter that restrictions on personal liberty require clear scientific justification and consistent application. With both sides standing firm, the dispute highlights the difficult balance between protecting public health and preserving individual freedoms during periods of heightened health concern.