The Claim

Removed the COVID-19 vaccines from the list of shots recommended for healthy children and pregnant women.

The Claim, Unpacked

What is literally being asserted?

The administration removed the CDC’s recommendation that healthy children and pregnant women receive COVID-19 vaccines. This is a factual description of a policy action: a federal health recommendation was downgraded from “should receive” to “may receive” for these populations.

What is being implied but not asserted?

The framing implies that COVID-19 vaccines were unnecessary or potentially harmful for healthy children and pregnant women — that the prior recommendation was wrong, and the administration corrected it. The placement under “Making America Healthy Again” implies this made children and pregnant women healthier. The word “removed” conveys decisive, protective action — as though the administration shielded these populations from something they did not need.

What is conspicuously absent?

The scientific evidence base for COVID-19 vaccination in children and pregnant women. The fact that COVID-19 remained the third leading infectious cause of death in children at the time. The data from over 1.5 million vaccinated pregnancies and 290 studies demonstrating vaccine safety. The fact that children under 6 months — too young to be vaccinated — were hospitalized at rates comparable to adults 75 and older, and that maternal vaccination was the primary protection for this group. The fact that the decision was made unilaterally by HHS Secretary Kennedy without consulting the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. The fact that a federal judge subsequently overturned this directive as part of a broader ruling finding the administration had violated federal law. The fact that several European countries that stopped recommending routine COVID vaccination for children did so in very different healthcare contexts — with universal coverage, paid sick leave, and far smaller populations — making the comparison inapt.

Evidence Assessment

Established Facts

On May 27, 2025, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced that the CDC would no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children and pregnant women. ¹ Kennedy made the announcement via video on social media, flanked by FDA Commissioner Dr. Martin Makary and NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. Kennedy cited a “lack of any clinical data to support the repeat booster strategy in children.” Makary stated that “there’s no evidence healthy kids need it today and most countries have stopped recommending it.” The CDC subsequently updated its website on May 30, 2025, replacing language that these groups “should” receive COVID-19 vaccines with language that vaccination “may” be given through “shared clinical decision-making.”

The recommendation change was made without consulting the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), which had been scheduled to meet later that month to discuss 2025-2026 COVID vaccine recommendations. ² The CDC has historically followed ACIP’s lead on vaccine recommendations, and the committee’s role is established by federal law. Kennedy preempted the committee’s scheduled review. In June 2025, Kennedy fired all 17 ACIP members and replaced them with new appointees, several of whom — including Robert Malone and Martin Kulldorff — were known vaccine skeptics.

On October 6, 2025, the CDC formally adopted “individual-based decision-making” for COVID-19 vaccination, further codifying the May directive. ³ The updated immunization schedule stated that “the risk-benefit of vaccination in individuals under age 65 is most favorable for those who are at an increased risk for severe COVID-19.” COVID-19 vaccines remained available through Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, the Vaccines for Children Program, and ACA-regulated insurance plans.

On March 16, 2026, U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy blocked Kennedy’s vaccine policy changes, including the May 2025 COVID-19 vaccine directive. ⁴ The ruling in American Academy of Pediatrics v. Kennedy (1:25-cv-11916, D. Mass.) stayed the May 2025 Secretarial Directive on COVID-19 vaccine recommendations, the January 5, 2026 childhood vaccine schedule revision, and the appointment of 13 new ACIP members. Judge Murphy found the administration had made “arbitrary and capricious decisions” and that “the Government has disregarded those methods and thereby undermined the integrity of its actions.” The ruling effectively restored pre-Kennedy vaccine recommendations. The administration announced it would appeal.

COVID-19 remained a significant threat to children, particularly infants, at the time of the recommendation change. ⁵ CDC data showed that children under 6 months were hospitalized for COVID-19 at rates comparable to adults 75 and older. COVID-19 was the third leading infectious disease cause of death in U.S. children aged 0-17. More than 2,000 children aged 18 and under had died from COVID-19 since the pandemic began, with approximately one-third being under 1 year old. CDC surveillance from the 2022-2023 season showed fewer than 5% of hospitalized children had received recent COVID vaccination.

The scientific evidence supported COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy, based on data from over 1.5 million vaccinated pregnancies. ⁶ A living systematic review and meta-analysis published in Drug Safety found COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy was not associated with adverse neonatal or maternal outcomes. Vaccine effectiveness against severe complications in pregnant women was 58% after the primary series and 65% with a booster dose. Pregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19 faced a twofold increased risk of ICU admission and a 70% increased risk of death compared to nonpregnant women. Maternal vaccination also protected infants under 6 months who were too young to be vaccinated themselves.

Strong Inferences

The recommendation change was driven by political ideology rather than new scientific evidence. ⁷ No new safety signals or efficacy data prompted the change. The American Academy of Pediatrics called the announcement “really concerning” and noted it “takes away choice.” The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) said it was “extremely disappointed” and emphasized “the science has not changed.” The Lancet published an editorial stating that the CDC’s withdrawal of pregnancy guidance was made “without review by the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices” and that Kennedy’s “cited safety concerns remain unsubstantiated by the broader scientific community.” Former CDC Director Rochelle Walensky compiled studies showing COVID vaccines were 94% effective in preventing hospitalization in adolescents and 68% effective in children 5-11 during the Omicron wave.

The claim that “most countries have stopped recommending” COVID-19 vaccines for children overstates the international consensus and ignores critical context. ⁸ While several European countries — including Denmark and the UK — shifted to recommending COVID vaccination only for high-risk children, these decisions were made in fundamentally different contexts. Denmark has universal healthcare, robust disease surveillance, and a population of 5.9 million. The UK’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation cited resource constraints and cost-effectiveness modeling, not safety concerns. The Lancet editorial noted that Australia continued to recommend vaccination for unvaccinated pregnant individuals. Importantly, no peer country removed COVID vaccine recommendations by unilateral political directive without advisory committee input.

The recommendation change reduced vaccination rates and removed insurance coverage guarantees for some populations. ⁹ When vaccines shift from “recommended” to “shared clinical decision-making,” uptake predictably declines. Childhood COVID vaccination rates were already low at approximately 13% before the change. Yale health policy researcher Jason Schwartz warned the change could be “incredibly harmful to the success of vaccination programs” due to the confusion generated. Insurance coverage remained technically available under the new framework, but weaker recommendations historically correlate with reduced provider encouragement and lower uptake.

What the Evidence Shows

The factual core of this claim is accurate: the administration did remove COVID-19 vaccines from the list of shots routinely recommended for healthy children and pregnant women. HHS Secretary Kennedy announced the change on May 27, 2025, the CDC updated its website by May 30, and the formal immunization schedule was revised in October 2025 to adopt “individual-based decision-making” for COVID-19 vaccination in these populations.

But the claim presents this change as a straightforward public health improvement — as though the prior recommendation was wrong and the correction made America healthier. The evidence tells a different story. COVID-19 remained the third leading infectious cause of death in children. Infants under 6 months were being hospitalized at rates matching those of adults over 75, and maternal vaccination was the primary means of protecting them. The body of evidence supporting vaccine safety in pregnancy included over 1.5 million vaccinated pregnancies across 290 studies. No new data prompted the change — the decision was driven by the political priorities of an HHS Secretary who had built his public career on vaccine skepticism.

The process was as notable as the outcome. Kennedy bypassed the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which was scheduled to meet weeks later to review this very question. He then fired all 17 ACIP members and replaced them with appointees who included prominent vaccine critics. This was not a scientific review that arrived at a different conclusion; it was a political intervention that circumvented the established evidence-based process. When the American Academy of Pediatrics and over 200 medical organizations sued, a federal judge found the government had “disregarded” established methods and “undermined the integrity of its actions,” blocking the directive along with the broader vaccine schedule changes.

The international comparison the administration cited was misleading. Countries like Denmark that narrowed COVID vaccine recommendations for children did so through deliberative, expert-led processes in healthcare systems with universal coverage and robust safety nets — not through unilateral political directives. And no peer country’s shift was driven by the kinds of safety concerns Kennedy and his allies promoted, which the broader scientific community found unsubstantiated.

The Bottom Line

The claim is factually true: the administration did remove COVID-19 vaccines from the recommended list for healthy children and pregnant women. This happened on May 27, 2025, and was formalized in the CDC’s immunization schedule in October 2025.

The steel-man case is that several developed countries had already narrowed their COVID vaccination recommendations for low-risk children, and that the risk-benefit calculus for routine COVID vaccination in healthy children may reasonably differ from that for immunocompromised populations. There is a legitimate policy discussion to be had about the appropriate level of recommendation as COVID transitions to an endemic respiratory virus.

But the way this was done — by unilateral political decree, without ACIP consultation, driven by an HHS Secretary with no public health credentials and a decades-long anti-vaccine advocacy career — was not that legitimate discussion. The decision ignored or contradicted the available evidence on maternal vaccination, where the data showing benefit was particularly strong. It was subsequently blocked by a federal court that found the administration had violated federal law. The claim presents a political intervention as a health improvement, when the evidence base supported the original recommendation, the process was procedurally unlawful, and the courts have since reversed the action. The recommendation change did not make children or pregnant women healthier; it made them harder to protect.

Footnotes

1. NPR, “CDC to stop recommending COVID vaccine for kids, pregnant women,” May 27, 2025; PBS NewsHour, “CDC removes language that says healthy kids and pregnant women should get COVID shots,” May 30, 2025; AHA News, “RFK Jr. says CDC will no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccine for healthy children, pregnant women,” May 27, 2025. ↩

2. NPR, May 27, 2025; CIDRAP, “The State of US Vaccine Policy: Special Edition,” March 17, 2026; STAT News, “RFK Jr. names ACIP members to replace vaccine experts he fired,” June 11, 2025. ↩

3. CDC Newsroom, “CDC Immunization Schedule Adopts Individual-Based Decision-Making for COVID-19,” October 6, 2025. ↩

4. NBC News, “Federal judge blocks RFK Jr.’s changes to childhood vaccine schedule,” March 16, 2026; APHA, “Federal Judge Blocks Immunization Schedule Changes, Stays ACIP Member Appointments,” March 2026; C&EN, “Relief and unease as court overturns RFK vaccine policies,” March 2026; Georgetown Health Care Litigation Tracker, AAP v. Kennedy (1:25-cv-11916). ↩

5. CDC COVID-NET surveillance data, 2024-2025; CDC provisional mortality data (ages 0-18); STAT News, “Covid-19 vaccines protect children from severe disease: the evidence,” September 19, 2025. ↩

6. Drug Safety, “Safety and Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines During Pregnancy: A Living Systematic Review and Meta-analysis,” 2024; The Lancet Obstetrics, Gynaecology, & Women’s Health, “Withdrawing COVID-19 vaccine guidance in pregnancy,” 2025. ↩

7. NPR, May 27, 2025; ACOG statement, May 2025; The Lancet Obstetrics, Gynaecology, & Women’s Health, 2025; STAT News, September 19, 2025. ↩

8. STAT News, “Why Denmark’s vaccine schedule works for Denmark — but not for the United States,” December 19, 2025; The Lancet Obstetrics, Gynaecology, & Women’s Health, 2025. ↩

9. PBS NewsHour, May 30, 2025; CIDRAP, March 17, 2026. ↩