Seven leading medical associations have sued to overturn recent HHS changes to the U.S. childhood vaccine schedule, arguing the revisions were implemented without the customary scientific review by the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). The groups seek to restore the April 15, 2025 schedule and to block the current ACIP panel from meeting, saying some new appointees lack appropriate expertise. HHS says ACIP is operating lawfully and will proceed with scheduled meetings.
Seven Major Medical Groups Sue to Reinstate CDC Childhood Vaccine Schedule
Several prominent medical groups are seeking to have the CDC's new vaccine recommendations reversed. - Brynn Anderson/AP/File
Seven prominent medical associations have filed a federal lawsuit seeking to reverse recent changes to the U.S. childhood vaccine schedule announced by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The plaintiffs say the alterations were made without the usual scientific review and could harm public health.
Who Sued and What They Seek
The complaint, filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts, was brought by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Physicians, the American Public Health Association, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the Massachusetts Public Health Association, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine and the Massachusetts Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics. The groups ask the court to restore the vaccine schedule to its April 15, 2025 version and to block the current Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) panel from meeting, including a session scheduled for February.
What Changed
Earlier this month HHS narrowed routine recommendations for meningococcal, hepatitis B and hepatitis A vaccines to people judged to be at higher risk. It also shifted guidance for influenza, Covid-19 and rotavirus vaccines to "shared clinical decision-making," meaning patients would need to consult a health care provider to receive those shots. HHS said insurers would continue to cover the vaccines.
Procedural Concerns and Allegations
The plaintiffs argue that, historically, major revisions to vaccine guidance were accompanied by new scientific evidence presented to the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). They contend that no new evidence challenging vaccine safety or effectiveness was presented to ACIP before the recent changes and that the revisions followed an order from President Donald Trump directing HHS to review the U.S. schedule against those of other developed nations.
“Defendants failed to consider important factors such as whether the changes to the Childhood Schedule would lead to increases in serious illness and death due to vaccine-preventable illnesses, or increased burden on the American healthcare system, or increased financial burden on American families,” the complaint says.
Officials' Responses and Panel Changes
HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon said the American Academy of Pediatrics is attempting to preserve a "broken status quo" and that ACIP "continues to operate lawfully and transparently." The department has scheduled ACIP to meet in February.
Secretary Kennedy recently removed previous ACIP members and the CDC director and appointed a new advisory panel. Among recent appointees are Dr. Kimberly Biss and Dr. Adam Urato, obstetrician-gynecologists who have publicly questioned prevailing vaccine positions; news reports and social media posts cited in the complaint characterize Dr. Biss as "anti-vaccine" and quote Dr. Urato as saying that "the science is not 'long-settled' regarding vaccines."
Policy Decisions and Context
After ACIP’s reconstitution last year, members voted to soften recommendations for universal hepatitis B vaccination of newborns and to stop endorsing certain influenza vaccines that contain thimerosal, a preservative that has been falsely linked to autism — a claim repeatedly debunked by scientific research. The reconstituted committee has said it will continue to reassess even long-established vaccine data.
Related Litigation
The complaint is part of a broader legal challenge against HHS over changes to ACIP and Covid-19 vaccine guidance. HHS moved to dismiss that suit, but U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy denied the motion earlier this month, allowing aspects of the related litigation to proceed.
What This Means: The outcome of the lawsuit could determine whether the April 15, 2025 childhood vaccine schedule is restored and whether the current ACIP membership continues to advise federal vaccine policy. The case underscores a contentious debate over process, expertise and the role of scientific review in shaping public health recommendations.
Help us improve.
