Judge Brian Murphy just STRUCK DOWN Health Sec. Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s move to recommend fewer vac

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2033637010112712851

[Wingnut]

How do you strike down a recommendation? 

[IsailedawayfromFR]

That judge has no standing to make this judgement.

We must deploy the tactics used on us.

[Bigun]

How do you strike down a recommendation?

You color FAR outside the lines!

[andy58-in-nh]

Left-wing activist Federal judges are now overruling the Executive Branch by means of an effective veto on otherwise Constitutional rules and recommendations they politically disagree with.

This is not what the Founders had in mind.

[Hoodat]

Judge Blocks RFK Jr.’s Appointees to Vaccine Panel

A district judge in Boston said the health secretary violated the law by appointing new members to the committee that made vaccine recommendations.

Stacy Robinson   |  3/16/2026

A federal judge in Massachusetts ruled on March 16 that Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. illegally appointed 13 new members to an influential vaccine panel beginning last June.

District Judge Brian Murphy also blocked that panel’s guidance memo revising the childhood immunization schedule and declared its previous votes invalid.

Murphy ruled Kennedy committed “a technical, procedural failure” by skirting around the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) to change the vaccine recommendations for children.

He said the government committed a similar mistake by removing the previous members of that committee, and replacing them “without undertaking any of the rigorous screening that had been the hallmark of ACIP member selection for decades.”

The plaintiffs, led by the American Academy of Pediatrics, originally sued after Kennedy ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to stop recommending the COVID-19 vaccine for pregnant women and healthy children.  .  .

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/judge-blocks-appointees-to-rfk-jr-s-vaccine-panel-5999566

[Hoodat]

He said the government committed a similar mistake by removing the previous members of that committee, and replacing them “without undertaking any of the rigorous screening that had been the hallmark of ACIP member selection for decades.”

Something else that has been a hallmark for decades - centuries even - has been a clear separation of power where the Judicial Branch doesn't micromanage Executive Department functions.

[Kamaji]

If it's untrammeled judicial activism, then appeal the decision.

Otherwise, maybe it isn't.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

If it's untrammeled judicial activism, then appeal the decision.

Otherwise, maybe it isn't.

That what having no standing is all about.

Judges rule on that all the time, so Congress and Executive should do the same.

Judicial does not have sole authority to interpret the Constitution.

[Kamaji]

That what having no standing is all about.

Judges rule on that all the time, so Congress and Executive should do the same.

Judicial does not have sole authority to interpret the Constitution.

The judiciary’s say on the Constitution is the final word; that’s the way judicial power works.  Even in areas the Courts terms political questions, it is the Court that decides that it doesn’t have the final say, not the executive or the legislative.

[Bigun]

The judiciary’s say on the Constitution is the final word; that’s the way judicial power works.  Even in areas the Courts terms political questions, it is the Court that decides that it doesn’t have the final say, not the executive or the legislative.

 

[Kamaji]

Right back atcha, Chief. 

[Smokin Joe]

Where is this about the Constitution? It's a complaint about a recommendation (i.e. not a law) because they don't think the selection process for the panel making the recommendation was followed. Apparently not enough people in thrall to Pharma were involved in picking who would recommend what, according to the judge.

Of course, those objecting to the process stood to make money off a longer list of recommendations. 

[Fishrrman]

I'm of the opinion that ALL judges in the USA, regardless of position -- be it local, state, federal, even Supreme Court -- should be subject to public recall.

Impeachment alone is "too high a hurdle".
When a judge acts egregiously, and if enough of the citizens object, that judge ought to be "removable".

How many of you remember Rose Bird ...?

[Kamaji]

Did anyone bother to read the opinion and order?  Y’know, the actual operative stuff, and then decide whether the decision was correct or not?

No, didn’t think so. 

[berdie]

Did anyone bother to read the opinion and order?  Y’know, the actual operative stuff, and then decide whether the decision was correct or not?

No, didn’t think so.

I can't say I did. I am assuming you did. So tell me your opinion on the decision.

[Wingnut]

I can't say I did. I am assuming you did. So tell me your opinion on the decision.

What ever he say's it would be wrong.

[Smokin Joe]

Did anyone bother to read the opinion and order?  Y’know, the actual operative stuff, and then decide whether the decision was correct or not?

No, didn’t think so.

Would that be legally correct, or medically correct?

[the OlLine Rebel]

Well come on, Kennedy is a Kennedy, and was always a quack before he kissed Trump’s….butt.

[Wingnut]

Well come on, Kennedy is a Kennedy, and was always a quack before he kissed Trump’s….butt.

At least he's not a Sloshberg.

[Hoodat]

Did anyone bother to read the opinion and order?  Y’know, the actual operative stuff, and then decide whether the decision was correct or not?

I've read it.  And I challenge anyone to identify any mention of a single law or statute that was violated:  https://litigationtracker.law.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/American-Academy-of-Pediatrics_2026.03.16_ORDER-ON-MOTION-FOR-PRELIMINARY-INJUNCTION.pdf


Gotta love this legalspeak:

“Science,” like law, “is far from a perfect instrument of knowledge.” Carl Sagan, The
Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark 29 (1997). History is littered with
once-universal truths that have since come under scrutiny. Nevertheless, science is still “the best
we have.” Id.1
“Procedure is to law what scientific method is to science.” In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 21
(1967) (cleaned up). Although sometimes seemingly tedious, “the procedural rules which have
been fashioned from the generality of due process are our best instruments for the distillation and
evaluation of essential facts from the conflicting welter of data that life and our adversary methods
present.” Id.
For our public health, Congress and the Executive have built—over decades—an apparatus
that marries the rigors of science with the execution and force of the United States government.

Further down, the Judge to his credit cites the ACA (and several other unnamed 'mystery' statues).  But that's as far as it gets.  While saying that ACIP gets to make recommendations on vaccines, nowhere does it say that they were blocked from doing so.  This is 100% fiat, 0% law.