During a recent court session in Boston, Isaac Belfer, a lawyer for the U.S. Department of Justice, contended that Kennedy possesses extensive authority to implement changes in federal vaccine policy, including those already enacted and potential future actions. Belfer claimed that by challenging these changes, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and other medical organizations were effectively asking the court to micromanage vaccine policy indefinitely.
However, U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy expressed doubt about Kennedy's seemingly limitless authority. "Is it your position that [Kennedy] is totally unreviewable?" Murphy inquired of Belfer, referencing a hypothetical scenario where Kennedy might suggest a vaccine that causes rather than prevents measles. Belfer’s response was affirmative.
Representing the Department of Health and Human Services, Belfer argued that the medical groups sought to influence vaccine policy through judicial means. Nonetheless, James Oh, the attorney for these groups, retorted that the policy changes bypassed standard procedures and lacked scientific backing, characterizing them as arbitrary actions.
"Kennedy's vaccine policy changes reveal an attitude of someone who thinks he can do as he pleases," Oh stated, as reported by Stat News.
Judge Murphy indicated he would issue a decision on the injunction before the CDC's vaccine advisors convene on March 18, emphasizing it as a "hard deadline."