A federal judge has mandated the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to reinstate nearly $12 million in funding for the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). This decision follows a lawsuit initiated by AAP regarding the termination of grants that support vital health programs for children. The ruling, delivered by U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell in Washington, D.C., highlights concerns about potential retaliation by the government.
Judge Howell granted a preliminary injunction on late Sunday, asserting that evidence suggested the HHS likely acted with a “retaliatory motive” when it cut the funding in December. In her ruling, Howell clarified that the case is not about the merits of the AAP’s stance on public health issues, such as vaccinations or gender-affirming care. Instead, it examines whether the federal government misused its power to suppress a significant professional organization working to enhance children’s health.
The funding cuts affected seven grants that facilitated various public health initiatives. These included efforts to prevent sudden unexpected infant deaths, bolster pediatric care in rural areas, and assist teenagers facing substance use and mental health challenges. AAP contends that the funding was withdrawn as a direct response to its vocal opposition to certain policies of the Trump administration.
In correspondence with AAP, HHS maintained that the grants were eliminated because they no longer aligned with the department’s strategic priorities. The agency has categorically denied any allegations of retaliation.
The AAP has been outspoken in its advocacy for pediatric vaccinations and has publicly criticized HHS’s positions on several health matters. Notably, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Health Secretary known for his anti-vaccine stance, has implemented significant changes to childhood vaccine recommendations. Last year, AAP also released its own guidelines regarding COVID-19 vaccinations, which diverged considerably from the government’s recommendations. The organization has further expressed its support for access to gender-affirming care, opposing government actions that it views as encroachments on the doctor-patient relationship.
In explaining her ruling, Judge Howell emphasized that AAP demonstrated it would likely incur irreparable harm if the cuts were not reversed. She also noted that allowing the organization to continue its programs aligns with the public interest as the lawsuit progresses.
Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which represents AAP in this legal matter, stated that the court’s ruling reinforces the principle that “no administration gets to silence doctors, undermine public health, or put kids at risk.” She affirmed the commitment to continue fighting against what she termed unlawful retaliation.
As the case unfolds, the implications of this ruling could reverberate throughout public health policy and advocacy efforts in the United States. A spokesperson for HHS and the department’s legal representatives did not provide comments regarding the ruling.
