Kennedy’s Vaccine Policy Changes Spark Legal Concerns and Controversy

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is facing scrutiny over his recent attempts to alter the U.S. pediatric immunization schedule. In June, he was reported to have appointed new members to an influential immunization panel and clashed with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) regarding vaccination policies.

Legal experts warn that Kennedy’s authority to change the vaccine schedule is not without limits. According to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), a law requiring federal officials to engage in an open, deliberative process when issuing new regulations, Kennedy must navigate a careful legal framework, said Lawrence Gostin, a law professor at Georgetown University.

“As a matter of law, Secretary Kennedy has final authority to make federal policy,” Gostin stated, “but he must follow a reasoned process.” Kennedy’s planned announcement to align U.S. vaccine recommendations with those from Denmark was abruptly canceled, with HHS citing a scheduling conflict. Reports suggest this decision came after advisers indicated that the move could be legally and politically precarious.

HHS has indicated that the press conference to discuss children’s health will be rescheduled but offered no confirmation on the changes to the vaccine schedule. HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon described previous reports regarding these changes as speculation.

Kennedy, known for his long-standing anti-vaccine stance, had expressed eagerness to adjust the immunization schedule following a directive from former President Trump. “Thank you, Mr. President. We’re on it,” he had tweeted after the directive.

Dorit Reiss, a law professor at the University of California, San Francisco, emphasized the importance of following APA guidelines. Reiss noted that any attempt to replace the current vaccine schedule with that of Denmark could expose the Trump administration to claims of arbitrary and capricious decision-making.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has traditionally been responsible for developing vaccine recommendations based on extensive medical evidence and public input. States maintain the authority to decide their vaccine requirements, meaning that even if Kennedy adopts a new schedule, states may not follow it.

Critics have raised concerns about Kennedy’s legal approach to vaccine policy. Numerous lawsuits have already accused the Trump administration of violating the APA. In July, the American Academy of Pediatrics contested further removals of vaccines from the CDC schedule.

Experts assert that simply declaring a new vaccine schedule without adhering to the established legal procedures would likely lead to challenges in court. Richard H. Hughes IV, a law professor, noted that any alterations must be justified with robust evidence and thorough deliberation.

If Kennedy follows a transparent process, he will ultimately retain decision-making power regarding any changes, according to Gostin. However, critics warn that not engaging with ACIP or failing to justify his decisions adequately could lead to significant backlash and long-term consequences for public health.