In a decision that’s already sending shockwaves through the public health community, a federal vaccine advisory panel appointed by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has broken from years of precedent by declining to recommend that all Americans over six months old receive the COVID-19 vaccine. The vote, which took place on September 19, 2025, signals a sharp turn in federal vaccine policy at a time when COVID levels remain stubbornly high in parts of the country—including Massachusetts, where state officials are now openly defying the new federal stance.
For the past several years, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has consistently urged annual COVID shots for everyone over six months of age. But this week’s vote marks the first time since the pandemic’s onset that the panel has withheld a broad recommendation, instead suggesting that COVID vaccination be determined through “shared clinical decision-making” between patients and their doctors. The panel narrowly avoided requiring a prescription for the vaccine, but it did advocate for stronger language around potential vaccination risks. The move comes just as CDC data show COVID caused between 32,000 and 51,000 deaths—and over 250,000 hospitalizations—in the U.S. last fall and winter, with unvaccinated seniors and young children most at risk.
This abrupt shift at the federal level has not gone unnoticed by state governments. On September 18, 2025, Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey announced that her administration would issue its own guidance, recommending that all adults and young children in the state get vaccinated against COVID-19. Massachusetts public health officials have gone further, urging two doses of the latest COVID vaccine (administered six months apart) for adults 65 and older, and a single dose for most other adults. Children aged 6 to 23 months are also strongly encouraged to receive a primary vaccine series or boosters, while older children with certain medical conditions should be vaccinated, and healthy kids aged 2 to 18 may be vaccinated at parental discretion.
“We all have people in our lives who are vulnerable,” Healey told reporters at the State House. “We want to make sure that they have accurate information, that they have science-backed information, and they're getting the word from medical experts. That's what this is about.” According to WBUR, the Massachusetts Medical Society and other physician groups praised the state’s move, emphasizing its foundation in science and concern for the most vulnerable.
Massachusetts’ top public health official, Dr. Robbie Goldstein, underscored the urgency for young children, saying, “It's really important that those young children, those young babies, get the vaccine to protect themselves going into the respiratory virus season.” Goldstein, an infectious diseases doctor with prior CDC experience during the Biden administration, noted that the state’s recommendations were developed in concert with other northeastern states and are backed by national COVID data and expertise from the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Academy of Family Physicians.
So why the divergence? Critics point squarely at Kennedy, who has made a career out of questioning vaccines and has recently recommended against COVID vaccination for pregnant people and children. Since assuming his post, Kennedy has fired the CDC director, Susan Monarez, and replaced members of the vaccine advisory panel with his own appointees—some of whom have been accused of spreading vaccine misinformation. “Because [President] Donald Trump put a conspiracy theorist in charge of HHS, we are where we are, and it's most unfortunate. They started this by completely dismantling public health in this country,” Healey said, as reported by WBUR.
The political drama intensified earlier this month when Monarez, the ousted CDC director, testified before the Senate about what she described as a dangerous politicization of the agency under Kennedy’s leadership. She alleged she was fired for refusing to rubber-stamp ACIP recommendations regardless of scientific justification. “Based on what I observed during my tenure, there is a real risk that recommendations could be made restricting access to vaccines for children and others in need, without rigorous scientific review,” Monarez warned.
The federal advisory panel’s decision was not without controversy. During its meeting, members debated concerns over myocarditis—a rare heart inflammation that has occurred mostly in younger men as a vaccine side effect. A scientist studying genetic susceptibility to myocarditis revealed that his research grant had been canceled by the Trump administration before completion. Much of the panel’s skepticism focused on mRNA vaccines, the technology that enabled the rapid rollout of COVID vaccines during the pandemic. Kennedy has repeatedly questioned the safety of these vaccines, despite overwhelming scientific consensus to the contrary, and announced in August his intent to cancel $500 million in mRNA vaccine research.
Medical professionals have raised alarms about the new federal approach. Dr. Sean O’Leary of the American Academy of Pediatrics told the Associated Press, “It was a very, very strange meeting,” and called the decision not to recommend vaccination “extraordinarily vague.” He warned that the panel’s discussion included clear efforts to “sow distrust” about vaccines, which could have “real-time impacts on American children.” Several medical groups have argued that adding barriers—such as requiring a prescription or emphasizing risks—could confuse the public and reduce vaccination rates, potentially fueling further outbreaks.
Meanwhile, states like Massachusetts are working to ensure continued access. The Healey administration issued a standing order for pharmacies to provide COVID vaccines and required insurance plans regulated by the state to cover the shots at no cost to patients. A national health insurance trade group also confirmed that, as of September 1, 2025, health plans would continue to cover vaccines recommended by federal officials before the ACIP’s latest meeting.
Other states are similarly charting their own course. Western states—including California, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii—have issued independent COVID vaccine guidelines, often more robust than the new federal recommendations. Massachusetts’ coalition with Connecticut, Maine, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island reflects a growing trend of states banding together in response to what they see as a federal retreat from science-based policy.
COVID, for its part, is not letting up. Wastewater surveillance data from the CDC show that the virus remained at a “high” level in Massachusetts and nationally in September 2025. State officials and doctors continue to stress that, while the pandemic’s acute crisis may have passed, the virus still poses a significant risk—especially to the elderly, the immunocompromised, and the very young.
As the fall respiratory virus season looms, the debate over vaccine policy has become a flashpoint in the broader struggle over public health authority, scientific integrity, and political interference. Whether the federal government’s new approach will stand, or whether states will lead the way in protecting their residents, remains to be seen. But for now, the message from Massachusetts is clear: science, not politics, should guide the fight against COVID-19.
