A U.S. federal judge has indefinitely halted the activities of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s vaccine advisory committee, preventing it from hearing testimony from individuals who claim to have suffered injuries following COVID-19 vaccination.
The decision affects the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), which had scheduled a two-day meeting for March 18 and 19 to discuss and vote on recommendations related to COVID-19 vaccine injuries.
According to a notice published in the Federal Register, the panel planned to review public comments and deliberate on potential policy updates
However, U.S. District Judge Brian E. Murphy issued a ruling that paused the committee’s actions and disbanded the ACIP panel convened under U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.. The judge also temporarily blocked recent changes the committee made to vaccine recommendations.
Ahead of the meeting, nearly 1,170 public comments were submitted to ACIP, many describing personal experiences of adverse events allegedly linked to COVID-19 vaccines. Several submissions came from individuals who said they or their family members experienced serious health complications following vaccination.
Dr. Sheri Weinstein, an internist and regenerative medicine physician, wrote that she had filed more than 50 reports with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) concerning her patients. In her submission, she alleged a range of conditions following vaccination, including neurological, cardiovascular, and autoimmune disorders.
Other commenters shared personal stories of sudden illnesses or deaths they believe occurred after vaccination. One anonymous nurse wrote that she received the vaccine to comply with workplace requirements and later experienced ongoing respiratory symptoms and fatigue.
Henrietta Simoes described the death of her 34-year-old son 16 days after receiving the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. She said his case was published in a peer-reviewed journal and called for further investigation by federal authorities.
READ ALSO: Senator releases records alleging Biden-era officials downplayed COVID-19 vaccine stroke risk
Heather Hudson also urged ACIP to review her son Cody’s case. According to Hudson, Cody developed an autoimmune blood-clotting disorder after receiving two doses of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine in 2021 and has since suffered multiple strokes.
His situation has inspired proposed legislation in Florida known as “Cody’s Law,” which seeks to expedite vaccine injury compensation claims under certain state healthcare programs.
The ruling stems from a lawsuit filed by the American Academy of Pediatrics and other medical organizations against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
The lawsuit, initiated in July 2025, challenges changes made under Kennedy to COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for children and pregnant women.
As part of their legal action, the groups sought an injunction to halt ACIP’s activities and suspend revisions to the childhood immunization schedule. Judge Murphy’s ruling granted a pause while the case proceeds.
Dr. Ryan Cole of the Independent Medical Alliance also criticized the decision, alleging that industry influence played a role in the legal challenge.
Separately, Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and four other organizations launched a “COVID Justice” campaign in February, calling for accountability regarding pandemic-era policies. Organizers say more than 34,000 people have signed their resolution.
A national survey conducted in November 2025 reported that 1 in 10 U.S. adults experienced what respondents described as a “major” side effect following COVID-19 vaccination. Public health authorities have previously maintained that COVID-19 vaccines underwent rigorous testing and continue to be monitored for safety through established reporting systems.
The legal battle underscores ongoing divisions over vaccine safety policies and pandemic-era mandates. As of press time, HHS had not responded to inquiries about whether Kennedy plans to appoint new ACIP members, resume meetings, or appeal the court’s ruling.
For now, individuals who had hoped to present their cases before the federal advisory body remain in limbo, as the court’s order keeps the committee’s proceedings on hold indefinitely.