On July 7, 2025, six prominent medical organizations and a pregnant physician filed a federal lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and its Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., challenging recent changes to federal COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. The plaintiffs argue that these unilateral policy shifts undermine public health and violate federal administrative procedures.
Plaintiffs and Allegations
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, includes the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), American College of Physicians (ACP), American Public Health Association (APHA), Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), and the Massachusetts Public Health Alliance (MPHA). Additionally, a pregnant physician, referred to as “Jane Doe,” is a plaintiff concerned about her ability to access COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy .
The plaintiffs contend that Secretary Kennedy’s May 2025 directive to remove COVID-19 vaccines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) immunization schedules for healthy children and pregnant individuals was made without proper scientific review and bypassed established federal processes. They argue that this action has caused confusion among healthcare providers and patients, potentially leading to decreased vaccination rates and increased risk of preventable diseases .(reuters.com)
Key Concerns
- Unilateral Policy Changes: The plaintiffs assert that Secretary Kennedy’s decision to alter vaccine recommendations without consulting the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) or other scientific bodies violates federal law and established procedures for public health policy development .
- Dismissal of ACIP Members: In June 2025, Secretary Kennedy dismissed all 17 members of the ACIP and replaced them with individuals who have expressed skepticism about vaccines. The plaintiffs argue that this move undermines the credibility and independence of the CDC’s advisory processes .(ajmc.com)
- Impact on Public Health: Medical experts express concern that the policy changes could erode public trust in vaccines, particularly among vulnerable populations such as pregnant individuals and children. They warn that this may lead to lower vaccination rates and a resurgence of preventable diseases .(investors.com)
Legal Action and Requested Remedies
The plaintiffs seek both preliminary and permanent injunctions to halt the implementation of the new vaccine recommendations. They also request a declaratory judgment affirming that Secretary Kennedy’s actions were unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act. Lead counsel Richard H. Hughes IV emphasized the importance of upholding scientific integrity in public health policy and expressed hope for a court ruling by September 2025 .(ajmc.com)
Government Response
HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon stated that Secretary Kennedy “stands by his CDC reforms,” defending the changes as necessary to ensure that federal vaccine policies are based on the best available science and free from conflicts of interest .(wfsb.com)
Implications for Public Health Policy
The outcome of this lawsuit could have significant implications for the future of vaccine policy in the United States. A ruling in favor of the plaintiffs may reinforce the importance of scientific review and procedural transparency in public health decision-making. Conversely, a decision upholding the policy changes could set a precedent for more direct executive influence over federal health guidelines.
As the case progresses, it will likely continue to attract attention from healthcare professionals, policymakers, and the public, given the critical role of vaccination in preventing infectious diseases and protecting public health.
