The effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in transplantation has triggered a debate over pretransplant vaccination requirements, which has several layers. First, is vaccination right, in the sense that it is supported by persuasive evidence? This question is accessible to most clinicians and health systems that, despite the ever-growing complexity of COVID-19 vaccination data, have expertise in interpreting this research and making clinical recommendations. Second, is vaccination right, in the sense that it is ethical according to any of several moral theories, whether on the basis of harms and benefits, duties, virtues, or compassion? This question can be approached using the practical ethical toolkit with which most clinicians are familiar: the principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice. Many also have a moral intuition about the importance of vaccination. The previous literature explores these principles in depth, citing the devastating effect of COVID-19 after immunosuppression, the relative benefits of pretransplant compared with post-transplant vaccination, the duty to responsibly distribute donor organs, and potentially competing duties to care for patients.1,2 These arguments establish the importance of vaccination and the role of transplant centers in promoting both vaccination and transplantation. But to best answer the question of whether transplant centers should impose vaccination requirements for transplant listing, we must consider a third, and deeper layer: what rights can be claimed or enforced for vaccination and transplantation?