On Wednesday, the American Academy of Pediatrics filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, seeking to block nearly $12 million in cuts to its funding. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and marks a significant escalation in the dispute between the pediatric group and the federal agency.
The lawsuit alleges that HHS terminated grants to the organization abruptly earlier this month, a move that the academy says threatens its ability to continue vital public-health programs. The filing specifically requests an injunction to prevent the loss of the nearly $12 million in federal awards that have supported a wide range of child-health initiatives.
The cuts were described by the academy as a sudden and unanticipated withdrawal of support that could cripple programs designed to protect infants and children across the country. The funding had enabled the academy to maintain programs focused on sudden unexpected infant death prevention, rural pediatric care, and mental-health and substance-use support for teens.
The academy argues that without replacement funding it must immediately terminate its work on dozens of programs that save children’s lives every day. “AAP does not have other sources of grant funding to replace the federal awards, and without the necessary funds it must immediately terminate its work on its dozens of programs that save children’s lives every day,” says the lawsuit.
The suit further claims that HHS made the cuts in retaliation for the pediatric group’s public criticism of the Trump administration’s policies and actions. The academy contends that its outspoken stance on vaccine safety and other health matters has made it a target for federal reprisal.
The American Academy of Pediatrics has long championed pediatric vaccination and has publicly opposed HHS positions on vaccine policy. Earlier this year, the academy released its own recommendations on COVID-19 vaccines that substantially diverged from the government’s guidance.
The organization also supports access to gender-affirming care and has criticized HHS for what it calls infringements on the doctor-patient relationship. This position places the academy at odds with federal officials who have sought to limit such care.
Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, is representing the pediatric group in the lawsuit. Perryman’s organization is a legal advocate for protected speech in the health-care sector.
“The Department of Health and Human Services is using federal funding as a political weapon to punish protected speech, trying to silence one of the nation’s most trusted voices for children’s well-being by cutting off critical public-health funding in retaliation for speaking the truth,” said Skye Perryman.
A spokesman for HHS could not immediately be reached for comment on the lawsuit or the alleged funding cuts.
Mark Del Monte, CEO and executive vice president of the 67,000-member doctors’ group, said the organization depends on its relationship with the federal government. “We need this partnership to advance policies that prioritize children’s health. These vital child health programs fund services like hearing screenings for newborns and safe sleep campaigns to prevent sudden unexpected infant death,” he said.
Del Monte added that the legal action is necessary to preserve the programs that make communities safer and healthier. He emphasized that the academy’s work is essential for child-health outcomes nationwide.
The academy’s initiatives include nationwide hearing screening programs that catch ear-related problems early in life. Its safe-sleep campaigns aim to reduce sudden unexpected infant deaths by educating parents on proper sleep practices.
Funding from HHS has historically covered a significant portion of these programs, allowing the academy to reach underserved populations in rural areas and low-income communities. The loss of these funds could create a vacuum in services that many families rely on.
The lawsuit’s allegations suggest that the federal agency’s decision was politically motivated rather than based on budgetary considerations. The academy claims that the cuts were a direct response to its public advocacy.
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., known for his anti-vaccine advocacy, has been a key figure in reshaping federal vaccine policies. His tenure has been marked by efforts to overhaul vaccine guidelines.
Kennedy has pursued policies that the academy argues conflict with established pediatric recommendations. The academy’s divergence on COVID-19 vaccine guidance illustrates this tension.
In the academy’s COVID-19 vaccine recommendations, the group placed emphasis on age-specific dosing and risk assessment that differed from the federal guidance released under Kennedy’s leadership.
The academy maintains that its partnership with the federal government is essential for advancing policies that prioritize children’s health. The lawsuit seeks to protect that partnership from punitive actions.
The court’s decision on the injunction could set a precedent for how federal agencies handle funding for professional associations that publicly critique policy. It also highlights the legal boundaries of federal influence over private organizations.
The lawsuit warns that within a few weeks, the academy will have to begin laying off employees dedicated to this critically important work. The loss of staff would further weaken the organization’s capacity to deliver services.
Without the $12 million in federal support, many of the academy’s programs could be suspended or scaled back, affecting thousands of children and families. The lawsuit seeks to prevent this erosion of public-health infrastructure.
The academy’s legal team argues that the cuts are unjustified and that the organization has no alternative sources of grant funding to replace the federal awards. The lawsuit is a direct response to what the academy sees as retaliation.
The American Academy of Pediatrics’ lawsuit against HHS underscores the tension between federal policy decisions and the advocacy work of professional medical associations. The outcome will influence future interactions between the government and child-health advocates.
Key Takeaways
- The AAP is suing HHS to block nearly $12 million in funding cuts.
- The academy claims the cuts are retaliation for its vaccine and gender-affirming care positions.
- Without the federal support, the academy could terminate dozens of life-saving programs and lay off staff.
