Madison Area Lyme Support Group

Large medical groups including the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) have sued U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in response to recent changes to federal vaccine policy, including removal of the COVID shot from the federally recommended childhood vaccine schedule for healthy children  The AAP, American College of Physicians, Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA), American Public Health Association, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Massachusetts Public Health Alliance, and a pregnant woman filed a lawsuit in July 2025 against HHS Secretary Kennedy in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.¹

Plaintiffs alleged that changes to federal vaccine policy were made without scientific review and without following regulatory norms. They argued that the replacement of 17 members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and the cancellation of certain advisory meetings not only violated federal law, but also serves to erode public confidence in the public health infrastructure and the federal government’s mass vaccination program.

Plaintiffs aim to stop the vaccine policy changes implemented by Kennedy and restore the previous vaccine schedule.² Plaintiffs further allege that the replacement of previous ACIP members created a new panel of biased members in order to support Kennedy’s views on vaccination and the harm associated with mRNA biologics such as the COVID shot.³

Federal Judge Allows Case to Continue

The government moved to have the case dismissed for lack of standing, but on Jan. 6, 2026, a Massachusetts federal judge decided that the lawsuit can continue.

In order to bring a lawsuit, a party needs standing which means they have shown they suffered actual and direct harm from the challenged action.⁴ Judge Brian Murphy of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled that the plaintiffs have legal standing to sue the Secretary.

The government argued that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue because they failed to show that they suffered direct harm from the new vaccine schedule and the changes that took place as a result of ACIP recommendations. However, Judge Murphy concluded that the changes at ACIP violates the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which sets forth that membership on government advisory panels be “fairly balanced.”⁵  (See link for article)

Important quote:

While I am somewhat surprised that the court found that plaintiffs have standing to sue here, [the ruling] reflects misperceptions about vaccines and children’s health generally [and the decision] does not reflect the reality that the American Academy of Pediatrics and other organizations are in many respects trade organizations for their professions — primarily protecting the interests of their members, not children.⁷ ~ Kim Mack Rosenbert, Attorney for CHD