States Challenge Trump Era Vaccine Cuts

A coalition of fifteen states has filed a lawsuit against the former Trump administration, targeting recent federal changes that trimmed the child vaccine schedule from 17 to 11 illnesses. The plaintiffs argue:

Lack of scientific backing: The new plan lacks evidence and mirrors policies from a country with a very different health system.
Removal of advisory panel: The long‑standing Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), which guided vaccine timing for decades, was eliminated—undermining public safety.

Defendants

Department of Health and Human Services
Former secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and its acting director Jay Bhattacharya

Key Arguments

Vaccines save lives and keep costs down, according to state attorneys general.
Critics claim the new schedule leaves children vulnerable to serious diseases.
Arizona’s attorney general stresses that copying Denmark’s routine does not provide the same protection for U.S. families.

ACIP Disruption

The changes were made without reviewing the ACIP.
In June, committee members were replaced by appointees who share a skeptical view of vaccines.
Since then, the panel has rolled back several established practices, such as routine hepatitis B shots for newborns—a virus that can cause severe liver damage.

Federal Response

The federal government dismisses the lawsuit as a publicity stunt, asserting that its authority over vaccine schedules and committee composition is clear by law.

Parallel Legal Action

A separate suit, filed earlier this year by major medical groups, challenges the decision to halt COVID‑19 vaccine recommendations for healthy children and pregnant women. That case has attracted support from over a hundred public health experts, and a judge in Massachusetts is expected to rule soon.

States Involved

Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Maine
Maryland
Michigan
Minnesota
New Jersey
New Mexico
Oregon
Rhode Island
Wisconsin
Governor of Pennsylvania

The outcome of these legal battles could shape how vaccines are administered across the country for years to come.