A federal judge in the United States District Court for Massachusetts blocked a January 2026 memorandum that overhauled the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) childhood vaccine schedule. The court also stayed the appointment of thirteen members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and invalidated votes taken by the committee while the case moves forward. While the judge did not prevent the panel from meeting, his decision effectively canceled the upcoming ACIP meeting.1 2
Judge Brian Murphy issued the decision in a 45-page Memorandum and Order on a motion for a preliminary injunction. The court found that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claims that the government failed to follow the legal framework governing vaccine policy and advisory committees.3
The case was brought by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American College of Physicians (ACP), the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), and individual physicians after the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) removed all seventeen ACIP members and moved forward with changes to federal vaccine guidance.4
The U.S. government argued that ACIP’s recommendations are discretionary guidance and not subject to judicial review because they do not constitute final agency action. The court rejected that position and held that the January 2026 memorandum qualifies as final agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).5
CDC Changes to the Vaccine Schedule Pierced Vaccine Administrators Liability Shield
Judge Murphy wrote that defendants “fail to acknowledge the legal consequences of the CDC’s immunization schedules,” claiming that the vaccine schedules carry downstream legal effects tied to liability frameworks and regulatory implementation. Under the APA, agency action is reviewable where it produces legal consequences or determines rights and obligations, and the court found that standard satisfied here.6
The court held that because the CDC’s recommended vaccination schedule provides liability coverage for vaccine administrators, when medical workers give vaccines that are no longer on the CDC’s recommended vaccine schedule for universal use, the liability shield provided under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) no longer protects them from liability and they are civilly responsible for harm caused by their actions. Accordingly, the CDC’s schedule has legal consequences and is therefore reviewable.
The court’s determination places the CDC vaccine schedule within the category of actions that must comply with federal administrative law rather than discretionary guidance that can be changed without procedural safeguards.7
Judge Finds HHS 2026 Memorandum Did Not Adhere to Required Process
The court stated that Congress structured the federal mass vaccination program framework to incorporate ACIP review before changes to the vaccine schedule are made and determined that this step was not followed when the January 2026 Memo changing the CDC’s recommended childhood vaccine schedule was issued by HHS.8
The court found that the APA permits a court to block agency action when the agency ignores required procedures or acts outside its authority. Therefore, it was the court’s opinion that plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merit.9
The court also found the memorandum likely arbitrary and capricious because it veered from the longstanding policy of using ACIP’s recommendations when making changes to the vaccine schedule without an adequate explanation. The court explained that without an explanation for the change that it deemed reasonable, the courts are not able to scrutinize agency decisions.10
The court set forth:
A court simply ensures that the agency has acted within a zone of reasonableness and, in particular, has reasonably considered the relevant issues and reasonably explained the decision. Id. The “reasoned explanation requirement… is meant to ensure that agencies offer genuine justifications for important decisions, reasons that can be scrutinized by courts and the interested public.” Dep’t of Com., 588 U.S. at 785.11
Reconstituted ACIP Blocked By Federal Advisory Committee Act
The court analyzed the government’s decision to remove all seventeen ACIP members and replace them with a new group under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), a law that governs how federal advisory committees are formed and used.12
FACA’s fair and balanced requirement is supposed to prevent agencies from handpicking advisors to justify a predetermined outcome. The court sided with the plaintiffs who contend that the current members of ACIP lack qualifications and expertise necessary to accomplish the function of ACIP and instead “share[s] Secretary Kennedy’s anti-vaccine views.” Despite HHS, the defendant, pointing out that all of the ACIP members have advanced degrees and have a wide variety of experience in clinical and research backgrounds, it was the court’s opinion that that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed in their contention that the newly constituted ACIP violated FACA.13
The court’s decision comes dangerously close to deciding that because the newly constructed ACIP committee are not all vaccination proponents, they cannot be considered vaccine experts and therefore, are not qualified to sit on the panel.
The Court does not suggest that the other members are not experts in their respective fields, only that the committee as reconstituted is not “fairly balanced in terms of…the functions to be performed.” 5 U/.S.C. 1004B)(2); see also ACIP Charter at 5 (directing that members “shall be” “knowledgeable in the fields of immunization practices”, “have expertise in the use of vaccines and other immunological agents,” “have expertise with clinical or laboratory vaccine research,” or “have expertise in assessment of vaccine efficacy and safety.14
Appeals to Murphy’s Order
The decision is preliminary and does not resolve the underlying claims with finality. An independent appeal has already been filed by attorney Richard Jaffe, and the administration has signaled its intent to challenge the ruling. On Mar. 17, 2026 DHHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon stated that the department “looks forward to this judge’s decision being overturned just like his other attempts to keep the Trump administration from governing.”15
Jaffe filed an appeal on Mar. 25, 2026 to Murphy’s preliminary injunction order on behalf of Children’s Health Defense, two physicians and two mothers whose children died after received multiple CDC-recommended vaccinations on the same day. He explained:
The order doesn’t just block the January 2026 schedule revision. It freezes the federal government’s ability to make vaccine policy at all. Murphy held that the CDC director cannot act on the immunization schedule without ACIP origination, and then he stayed nearly every ACIP appointment, so ACIP can’t meet. The Director can’t act independently. ACIP can’t convene. There is no third option. That’s the order we’re challenging.16
Jaffe added:
The government has not yet filed an appeal or motion to stay Murphy’s order. I have no idea when or whether it will…If Kennedy’s advisor are telling him there’s nothing to do and the solution is to just reappoint a new ACIP committee, they’re wrong. Murphy didn’t just reject specific appointees. He held that the appointment process ‘in general, and thus the full committee, was tainted.’ Any new appointments will need to satisfy whatever ‘balance’ criteria Murphy has in mind, criteria the opinion never defines. Kennedy will need Judge Murphy’s permission before ACIP can reconvene. And every future action Kennedy takes on vaccines that AAP doesn’t like will produce another amended complaint, another PI motion, and possibly contempt proceedings. Murphy’s order is a permanent leash on federal vaccine policy. It cannot stand.
If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.
Click here to view References:1 American Academy of Pediatrics, et al v. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, et al. Case 1:25-cv11916-BEM Mar. 16, 2026.
2 Gardner L. Federal judge puts RFK Jr.’s new vaccine schedule, advisers on ice. Politico Mar. 16, 2026.
3 Ibid.
4 American Academy of Pediatrics, et al v. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, et al. Case 1:25-cv11916-BEM Mar. 16, 2026.
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
11 Ibid.
12 Ibid.
13 Ibid.
14 Ibid.
15 CNBC. U.S. judge upends Kennedy’s overhaul of childhood vaccine policies. Mar. 17, 2026.
16 Jaffe R. We are Appealing AAP v. Kennedy. Here’s What’s Next. Mar. 25, 2026.
7 Responses
“the court ensures that the agency has acted within a zone of reasonableness” – making up the law.
The court has authority ONLY to determine if the agency exceeded its authority – which it clearly did not. The court can’t intervene because its personal view disagrees with the agency decision. For 50 years I disagreed with the CDC and FDA corporate puppet appointees and their institutionalized corruption. It required an executive change by the executive branch even though there was ample evidence fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest . . . to justified a court interveneing and staying decisions. But the courts are controlled by the industries no less than the appointees and politicians.
The court exceeded its authority, specifically the judge, and should be impeached. They worry about kings but ignore the tyranny of the small fiefdom “kings” when they do the bidding of the corporations or their political supporters.
The vaccine industry is powerful. The globalist that support the vaccine eugenics movement is powerful- well funded. They want you sick, dependant, docile and sterile.
Evil on so many levels.
Time to use your critical thinking, look through the indoctrination and propaganda and fight for your freedoms and health. We have a lot of housecleaning to do in the US. No more business as usual. You can’t afford to look the other way, bury your head in the sand or tacitly hide your decisions behind corrupt experts. It is harming your family.
Facts vs belief. The cult of vaccination zealots lives another day.
There is incontrovertible proof we managed to suppress and diminish the risk of rapidly spreading pathogens with soap, clean water, sanitation, plumbing. The vaccine program at scale was never necessary in the first place.
The entire vaccine program is built upon lies and false premises. They apparently are still able to bribe and coerce anyone they wish with impunity.
Guess what? We don’t give a damn what the judge or the CDC or anyone else says. We said no to vaccines and we meant it. Argument over. These people and their legalese, cherry picking administrative procedural act compliance over the constitution and individual rights, ignoring the exact same prescient for generations as the vaccine schedule expands infinitely with no end in sight. Total fraud. Clear the bench, they’re apparently as incompetent and corrupt as the previous policy for sale advisory panels.
If by judge Murphys point that all of the acip members are not balanced then what have they been since 1986? This is so frustrating that 1 judge can stop an entire government appointed committee that we the people voted on to help fix. The 1986 act was not meant to destroy our kids, but these doctors don’t know any better, ugh! This is ugly. How come this judge did not step in when 70+ shots were ok’d for our kids or else? Undoing the wrong our gov has done & this judge is now a single say so? They never seemed to care when the kids died only about the money pharma will lose. What’s the point of the acip then? Disgusting! The whole point is to see a difference in the sickness of our kids. So sick of all these judges. They could drag this on for years.
Very concerning!
Big Pharma will spend whatever it needs to, including MILLIONS in bribes, to block the proposed changes to the vaccine schedule!!
What also needs to happen, is to revoke the immunity that Big Pharma now enjoys that protects them from being held accountable for the damage and deaths that their toxic vaccines cause every day!!!
Judge Murphy, on the lowest level of federal judiciary appointments, is not qualified to issue a nation-wide ex post facto injunction. I suggest the FBI begin an immediate, thorough, and extremely deep review of the judge’s finances, expenditures, bank accounts, shadow LLCs, stocks, bonds, cryptos, amounts held in trust, and simple suitcases full of unmarked $100 bills. Also do his family, friends, neighbors and all agents who may in any way launder the pharma corporation’s bribes for him. Something smells really rotten in his action.
I am adding my “two cents” in this discussiion. As previous commenters have eloquently explained, the judge’s decision is based on politics and not factual data. Throw the bum out along with his decision(s) . The judge is a petty tyrant, illegally using the bench for promoting his personal political agenda.