2026年2月13日 美国东部时间晚上9:16 / 路透社
- 摘要
- 肯尼迪替换了关键疫苗专家小组的全部17名专家
- 疾控中心新时间表将儿童常规推荐疫苗数量减少至11种
- 墨菲法官面临紧迫的裁决时间线
波士顿，2月13日（路透社） – 美国主要医疗团体周五敦促一名法官阻止特朗普政府实施新的指导方针，该方针削减了儿童常规推荐接种疫苗的数量，并禁止卫生与公众服务部部长小罗伯特·F·肯尼迪（Robert F. Kennedy Jr.）精心挑选的疫苗咨询小组举行下次会议。
美国儿科学会及其他团体的律师在波士顿向美国联邦地区法官布莱恩·墨菲（Brian Murphy）表示，卫生官员为实现肯尼迪的目标而采取了非法行动，通过颠覆国家免疫政策，损害了公众健康并降低了接种率。
订阅《每日日程》（The Daily Docket）新闻通讯，获取最新法律新闻，直接发送到您的收件箱，立即开始您的一天。[点击此处注册]
广告 · 继续滚动阅读
“这对公众健康构成了明显且紧迫的威胁，”医疗团体的律师詹姆斯·欧（James Oh）表示。
他指出，在长期质疑疫苗安全性的肯尼迪领导期间，”最令人震惊”的行动是美国疾病控制与预防中心（CDC）于1月5日发布了新的免疫接种时间表，将儿童常规推荐疫苗数量从原有的17种削减至11种，并将另外6种疫苗降为非推荐状态。
欧表示，这一决定取消了针对轮状病毒、流感和甲型肝炎等疾病的广泛儿童疫苗推荐，”在医学界引发了警报”，但该机构未给出任何合理解释。
广告 · 继续滚动阅读
CDC表示，家长应在所谓的”共同临床决策”模式下咨询医疗服务提供者，而非直接推荐，同时保险公司将继续承担疫苗接种费用。
欧指出，这一决定发生在肯尼迪去年替换关键小组全部17名独立专家之后，该小组的建议影响着疫苗接种实践。他敦促法官阻止该小组（免疫实践咨询委员会，Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices）在2月26-27日举行会议。欧称，该小组现在由与肯尼迪反疫苗观点一致的人员主导，违反了《联邦咨询委员会法》要求小组必须保持公平平衡且不受不当影响的规定。
由民主党总统乔·拜登任命的墨菲法官似乎对该小组组建程序不合法的说法持开放态度，并询问是否可以考虑疫苗政策变化对”更广泛公共健康影响”的考量。
美国司法部律师艾萨克·贝尔弗（Isaac Belfer）则表示，卫生与公众服务部并未推行反疫苗议程，反而欢迎”对疫苗政策的激烈辩论”。但他称，该部门有广泛权力改变政策，以应对新冠疫情后公众对疫苗信任度下降的问题。
“法院不能以自己的判断替代行政机构的决定，”贝尔弗说。
墨菲未立即作出裁决，但在会议临近的情况下表示，他”必须在这个令人不安的紧迫时间线内对本案作出裁决”。
报道：内特·雷蒙德（Nate Raymond），编辑：罗莎尔芭·奥布莱恩（Rosalba O’Brien）
我们的标准：路透社信托原则
Medical groups urge US judge to block vaccine policy shifts under RFK Jr
February 13, 2026 9:16 PM UTC / Reuters
- Summary
- Kennedy replaced all 17 experts on key vaccine panel
- CDC’s new schedule reduces recommended childhood vaccines to 11
- Judge Murphy faces tight timeline for decision
BOSTON, Feb 13 (Reuters) – Major U.S. medical groups urged a judge on Friday to block the Trump administration from implementing new guidance cutting the number of vaccines routinely recommended for children and bar Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s handpicked vaccine advisory panel from holding its next meeting.
Lawyers for the American Academy of Pediatrics and other groups told U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in Boston that health officials acted unlawfully to fulfill Kennedy’s goals by upending national immunization policies in ways that would harm public health and reduce vaccination rates.
Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
“This is a clear and present danger to public health,” said James Oh, a lawyer for the groups.
He said the “most egregious” action taken under the watch of Kennedy, a long-time vaccine skeptic, was when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on January 5 issued a new immunization schedule that cut the number of routinely recommended childhood vaccinations to 11 and downgraded six others.
Oh said that decision, which removed the broad recommendation for childhood vaccines for diseases including rotavirus, influenza and hepatitis A, “set off alarms” in the medical community and occurred without any rational explanation from the agency.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
Instead of a recommendation, the CDC said parents should consult healthcare providers under what it calls shared clinical-decision-making, and said insurance providers would continue to cover the costs of the shots.
Oh said the decision occurred after Kennedy last year removed and replaced all 17 independent experts on a key panel whose recommendations shape vaccine practices.
He urged the judge to prevent that panel, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, from holding its February 26-27 meeting. Oh said it is now dominated by people aligned with Kennedy’s anti-vaccine views, in violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act’s mandates that it be fairly balanced and free of inappropriate influence.
Murphy, who was appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, appeared open to arguments the panel was unlawfully constituted and asked whether he could consider the “broader public health impacts” of the vaccine policy changes.
U.S. Department of Justice lawyer Isaac Belfer told him HHS was not pursuing an anti-vaccine agenda and welcomed “spirited debate about vaccine policy.” But he said it had broad authority to change policy to address a decline in public trust in vaccines following the COVID-19 pandemic.
“The court cannot substitute its judgment in place of the agency,” Belfer said.
Murphy did not immediately rule but, with the meeting upcoming, said he “must make a decision in this case on an uncomfortably tight timeline.”
Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston, Editing by Rosalba O’Brien
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
节点运行失败
发表回复