Issues a Preliminary Injunction – Kennedy’s Decisions Likely Violate the Federal Advisory Committee Act
A federal judge this week pumped the brakes on some of Kennedy’s actions over the last year that have undermined national vaccine policy.
In American Academy of Pediatrics v. Kennedy, a federal court issued a preliminary injunction blocking Kennedy’s overhaul of the nation’s vaccine advisory process and reversing all of his vaccine schedule changes since last June. The American Public Health Association is also a key plaintiff in the case.
The case centers on the CDC’s ACIP and Kennedy’s summary policy changes in which he bypassed ACIP altogether.
The judge issued the preliminary injunction halting Kennedy’s changes because he thinks the plaintiffs have a good chance of winning their lawsuit which argues the processes Kennedy has been using doesn’t follow required federal administrative law under the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
FACA requires that federal advisory panels be:
- Fairly balanced in expertise and viewpoints
- Scientifically qualified
- Selected through a transparent process
- Free from undue influence
In 2025, Kennedy removed the entire ACIP committee and replaced it using a slipshod and opaque process with people with little or no experience – many of whom are influencers with strident anti-vaccine opinions.
The few ACIP meetings that did take place over the last year used selective evidence, sidelined CDC scientists, didn’t follow standard evidence review procedures and made spurious claims and decisions.
Then, in January 2026, Kennedy went even further, completely bypassing ACIP, making summary changes to the child and adult vaccine schedules all on his own.
He moved the influenza, rotavirus, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, some meningococcal vaccines, and RSV protection from routine recommendation to “shared clinical decision-making”.
Those vaccines were still covered by insurance and VFC even though they were moved to the different category. But moving them out of routine recommendation matters.
Routine recommendations normalize vaccination, set the standard of care, drive provider behavior, and support strong uptake. Shared clinical decision-making status undermines those principles.
What the Court Found
The court focused on Kennedy’s flawed decision-making processes, not the scientific merit of his decisions. The preliminary injunction means the judge believes the plaintiffs are likely to win. The ruling points to three core problems:
- Bypassing ACIP: Federal law ties vaccine access and coverage to ACIP recommendations. Kennedy can’t rewrite the schedule alone, yet that’s what he did with 6 vaccines.
- Violating FACA: The court found strong evidence that ACIP was not properly constituted after Kennedy dismissed the former committee members. The new members were installed without standard vetting, and some had publicly documented anti-vaccine advocacy positions. Taken together, the committee appeared designed to deliver a predetermined outcome, the judge wrote.
- Arbitrary decision-making: Major policy changes are supposed to have a ‘reasoned explanation’. Kennedy didn’t do that… he just said the reason is that Denmark does it this way so we should too.
Under FACA, if an agency head uses a flawed advisory process (or doesn’t use a required advisory process.. or both) the resulting policy can be struck down as arbitrary and capricious. And that’s what Kennedy did. He used a flawed process.
What Happens Now
All vaccine policy changes Kennedy made since summer 2025 are now on hold. The system reverts to the prior schedule, including restoring routine recommendations for:
- Influenza
- Rotavirus
- Hepatitis A
- Hepatitis B
- Meningococcal vaccines
- RSV protection for infants
Further, the judge in the PI said ACIP, as currently structured, can’t operate as an official advisory committee moving forward because of the flawed process used by Kennedy to change the makeup of the committee. Upcoming meetings (which had been scheduled for this week) are canceled.
Open questions now are whether Kennedy will rebuild ACIP properly in advance of the actual lawsuit hearings or double down with the current members and appeal the PI. Probably the latter.
Regardless, access to vaccines stays intact for now and all 17 vaccines are back to being routinely recommended.
The past year has definitely taken a toll, but it’s refreshing to see that checks and balances – at least within the judicial branch of government – are still in place as guardrails.
Over the past year, those guardrails were pushed aside. This week, the court temporarily put them back.
