The new charter for the committee advising the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on vaccine use has shifted the focus of the committee’s duties. Instead of primarily recommending new vaccines, the committee is now tasked with evaluating alternative disease prevention methods.
While earlier versions of the committee’s charter highlighted the necessity for members to have experience in vaccine research, the updated document, published on the CDC’s website on Thursday, simply requires that the committee collectively possess a “balanced range of scientific, clinical, and public health expertise” pertinent to its mission. This broad criterion could potentially include individuals with limited experience in vaccines or vaccination policy.
Public health experts have suggested that the new charter is a strategy by health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., known for his criticism of vaccines, to bypass a legal challenge to his restructuring of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
Last June, Kennedy dismissed the entire previous committee and appointed a group of vaccine skeptics, many of whom lacked expertise in conducting vaccine clinical trials, evaluating trial results, or implementing vaccination guidelines—expertise that was traditionally required of committee members according to previous versions of the ACIP charter.
Following a legal challenge, a federal judge ruled preliminarily that the new committee members were largely unqualified to perform their roles, leaving the ACIP in a state of uncertainty. Before this administration, the committee convened three times annually—in February, June, and October. This year, however, it has yet to meet. The administration has appealed the court’s decision.
Sara Rosenbaum, professor emerita of health law and policy at George Washington University’s Milken Institute School of Public Health, remarked in an email to STAT, “When the court tells you that many of your appointments fail to meet the charter criteria and therefore the results of their deliberations must be set aside, change the charter.”
Rosenbaum further commented that the significant modifications to the ACIP charter reflect the Secretary’s intent to impose his skepticism about vaccines, which she described as a notable achievement in child health. According to her, Kennedy has altered the mission of a respected scientific advisory body to align with his view that vaccines are hazardous and has adjusted the qualifications for committee members to support this perspective.
Paul Offit, a pediatrician and vaccine expert at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, echoed these concerns. He stated, “RFK Jr. is trying to retrofit the charter to make it so that the people that he brought in … qualify. So therefore, he’s trying to make it so that we don’t have an expertise that can best advise us.”
The new charter, dated May 14, has been seen by various news outlets over the past weeks, though it was only recently posted online. The Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the CDC, has not responded to inquiries about the delay. A previous charter version, signed by Kennedy in March, was declared invalid.
Richard Hughes, the attorney who filed the legal challenge against the restructured ACIP for the American Academy of Pediatrics, believes the new charter aims to make the Kennedy-appointed committee less susceptible to legal scrutiny.
Hughes noted in an email, “The March charter was an overt attempt to shift ACIP’s focus to match Kennedy’s vaccine agenda — vaccine injury, cumulative exposure, vaccine components, mRNA platforms, and safety gaps — while adding non-traditional liaison groups and moving control closer to CDC leadership.”
He further explained, “Here, they are simply trying to minimize what they are doing on paper to avoid the legal consequences of their manipulation of the committee. The same architecture remains: looser expertise requirements, the changed liaison mix, more controllable and more aligned with Secretary Kennedy’s vaccine agenda, and less direct acknowledgement that ACIP recommendations drive [Vaccines for Children] access and insurance coverage.”
The Vaccines for Children program is a federal initiative ensuring that children from uninsured families have free access to all recommended immunizations.
Charlotte Moser, who was a member of the previous ACIP and dismissed by Kennedy in June 2025, expressed her concerns about the committee’s new focus, which emphasizes exploring alternatives to vaccines for disease prevention.
Moser stated, “The revised text suggests that rather than focusing on how to effectively and safely use vaccines, the committee should be comparing vaccines with ‘other preventive measures’ and advising on ‘gaps and limitations in evidence.’”
The legal case that has left the ACIP in a state of uncertainty is ongoing. Both parties recently submitted a status report to the presiding judge. There is disagreement between the government and the American Academy of Pediatrics’ legal team regarding which case materials should remain confidential.
