Federal Appeals Court Reviews Block on ACIP Appointments

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. removed all 17 members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in 2025, citing conflicts of interest, and appointed new advisers, including vaccine researcher Dr. Robert Malone and MIT professor Retsef Levi. The new panel rescinded several childhood-vaccine recommendations and announced a revised schedule that would cut routine immunizations from 17 diseases to 11. A district court in Massachusetts ruled in March that Kennedy likely violated federal procedures by selecting “distinctly unqualified” members and disregarding the statutory requirement for a balanced, expert panel. The judge temporarily blocked the appointments and the schedule changes while the lawsuit proceeds.

The Hill

Plaintiffs—including the American Academy of Pediatrics and other medical groups—argue that the district court’s order is the “least intrusive relief possible” and that, if the appointed individuals met legal qualifications, the order would not prevent ACIP from functioning. They contend that an unlawfully constituted ACIP meeting would injure the plaintiffs because they would be excluded from liaison roles and unable to influence recommendations.

The Epoch Times

The Justice Department, represented by attorney Matthew Zorn, maintains that the district court exceeded its authority by blocking the appointments before a final agency action occurred. Zorn argues that vacating the order would allow the secretary to reconstitute the committee without further litigation and would not harm the plaintiffs.

The Epoch Times

Zorn told the First Circuit panel that the practical effect of the lower-court ruling is to keep ACIP from meeting in any capacity, and that “the secretary wants to get the ACIP back to work, and we are being told if he reconstitutes any committee, it’s going to be right back in court.” He added that the government is asking the appeals court to vacate the order so the committee can resume its advisory role.

The Epoch Times

Plaintiff attorney Andrew Pincus responded that the plaintiffs would be injured if ACIP met with the currently blocked members, because the committee would lack the balance of views required for legitimate recommendations. He emphasized that the district court’s order is intended to ensure a lawful and balanced panel.

The Epoch Times

• “The secretary wants to get the ACIP back to work, and we are being told if he reconstitutes any committee, it’s going to be right back in court,” — Matthew Zorn, justice department attorney

The Hill

• “We’re asking the court to vacate the order on the appointments so that the secretary can reconstitute the committee and get it back to work,” — Matthew Zorn, justice department attorney

The Epoch Times

• “If that constellation of people was lawful, his order would not prohibit that ACIP from going forward,” — Andrew Pincus, an attorney for the plaintiffs

The Epoch Times

The First Circuit panel is considering whether to stay the district court’s order, a decision that will determine whether ACIP can reconvene while the broader lawsuit over Kennedy’s vaccine-schedule changes continues.

The Hill