Medical Groups Sue Over COVID-19 Vaccine Removal from CDC Schedules

On July 7, 2025, a coalition of leading medical organizations filed a lawsuit against Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., challenging his directive to remove COVID-19 vaccines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) immunization schedules for healthy children and pregnant women. The plaintiffs argue that this action violates federal administrative law, undermines science-based vaccine policy, and endangers public health by increasing the risk of preventable diseases.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, includes prominent groups such as the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American College of Physicians (ACP), the American Public Health Association (APHA), the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the Massachusetts Public Health Alliance (MPHA), and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM). An anonymous pregnant physician is also a plaintiff, expressing concern that the directive may impede her access to the COVID-19 vaccine, thereby endangering her unborn child.

In May 2025, Secretary Kennedy issued a directive removing COVID-19 vaccines from the CDC's immunization schedules for healthy children and pregnant women, bypassing established scientific review procedures. Subsequently, in June 2025, Kennedy dismissed all 17 members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), replacing them with individuals whose views often align with anti-vaccine sentiment.

The medical community has expressed strong opposition to Kennedy's actions. Dr. Susan J. Kressly, President of the AAP, stated, "These decisions are founded in fear and not evidence, and will make our children and communities more vulnerable to infectious diseases like measles, whooping cough, and influenza." Dr. Georges C. Benjamin, Executive Director of the APHA, described the mass ouster as "a coup," emphasizing that such actions are detrimental to public health.

State governments have also responded. Governors from California, Oregon, and Washington condemned the dismissal of the ACIP members, calling it a politically motivated move that jeopardizes public health and undermines scientific recommendations. They reaffirmed their commitment to following science-based guidelines to protect public health.

Experts warn that these actions could erode public trust in vaccines, potentially leading to lower vaccination rates and increased risk of vaccine-preventable diseases. Dr. Tom Frieden, former CDC director, stated that Kennedy's actions set "a dangerous and unprecedented action that makes our families less safe" by potentially reducing vaccine access for millions of people.

The lawsuit seeks to halt the implementation of Kennedy's directive and restore previous vaccine recommendations, arguing that the directive violates federal administrative law. The removal of COVID-19 vaccines from the immunization schedules could affect insurance coverage and access to these vaccines, creating inequities in vaccine access.

This is not the first time vaccine policies have been contested in the U.S., but the wholesale dismissal of the ACIP members is unprecedented. Previous disputes have typically involved debates over specific vaccines or mandates, not the complete overhaul of the advisory committee responsible for vaccine recommendations.

Secretary Kennedy has a history of vaccine skepticism and has promoted debunked theories linking vaccines to autism. His actions may be driven by these beliefs, despite extensive scientific evidence supporting vaccine safety and efficacy.

The lawsuit filed by major medical organizations against HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. highlights significant concerns about the integrity of vaccine policy in the United States. The dismissal of the ACIP members and the removal of COVID-19 vaccines from immunization schedules have sparked widespread criticism from the medical community and state governments. These actions raise critical questions about the role of scientific expertise in public health decision-making and the potential consequences for public trust and health outcomes.