A federal judge in Boston has dealt a major blow to the Trump administration's efforts to overhaul the nation's vaccine policies, including the controversial decision to slash the number of federally recommended vaccinations for children. US District Judge Brian Murphy of the District of Massachusetts ruled that federal health regulators had acted unlawfully in pursuing policy changes championed by HHS Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr.
The ruling carries immediate consequences for the government's vaccine agenda. The injunction nullified reconstituted-panel votes, including downgrades of universal hepatitis B birth-dose and broader COVID-19 recommendations, and blocked 13 appointees from serving. The meeting set to take place on Wednesday and Thursday will be postponed.
At the heart of Murphy's decision is a stark finding about the panel's expertise. Murphy found that of the 15 current ACIP members, only 6 appeared to have any meaningful experience in vaccines, despite the panel's own charter requiring that its members possess expertise in vaccine use and vaccine research. The new members of ACIP were appointed without a rigorous screening process.
The confusion over the panel's fate reflects the uncertainty now gripping vaccine policy. Over several social media posts on Thursday, one of the members appointed by Kennedy, Dr Robert Malone, said that the government will "disband and then recreate a new ACIP committee." Hours later, Malone posted that information he had shared was a "miscommunication, and in fact the decision about how to proceed has not been made, and dissolving and reforming remains one of options being considered."
The government's response signals it intends to fight the ruling. The Donald J Trump administration plans to appeal the ruling. "We look forward to this judge's decision being overturned just like his other attempts to keep the Trump administration from governing," HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon wrote on X on Monday.
Medical groups that brought the lawsuit have a different view of the stakes. They welcome the court decision, which blocks ACIP and the CDC from making further non-evidence-based changes to established vaccine recommendations and restores the recommendations in place prior to January 5, 2026. The ruling raises legitimate questions about how the government should balance deference to executive decision-making with the need for scientific process and technical expertise in public health.
For now, the court has barred ACIP from holding additional meetings until the court can assess the merits of the committee's reconstitution. What comes next remains genuinely unclear, as is whether the Trump administration will choose to appeal, disband and reconstitute the committee, or pursue some other path. The legal battle over vaccine policy is far from settled, and the outcome will shape how Americans receive immunisation guidance for years to come.