In the early days of President Trump’s second term, a series of executive orders initiated significant changes in public health policy under the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The orders included directives related to “gender ideology,” “diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI),” and “merit-based opportunities,” leading to the removal of numerous HHS websites and public health data associated with these themes. The implications for public health were immediate and far-reaching, impacting areas such as reproductive health, health disparities, and LGBTQ+ health issues.
Following the issuance of these executive orders, the HHS began to dismantle a substantial number of federal databases and websites that provided health information deemed aligned with the previous administration’s policies. This action sparked a legal challenge aimed at restoring access to this crucial information. By September 2025, the administration agreed to restore the removed health-focused websites and databases to their state as of January 29, 2025, highlighting the ongoing tensions between differing public health philosophies in the federal government.
In tandem with these actions, on February 7, 2025, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced a controversial change to its indirect cost rate guidance, proposing a recent 15% rate for all grants. This figure represented a significant reduction from historical rates and could potentially diminish funding for health research institutions across the nation. The policy was immediately challenged in court, resulting in multiple judicial interventions that temporarily halted its implementation.
Leadership Changes and New Initiatives
On February 13, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Was confirmed as the Secretary of HHS, with a narrow Senate vote of 52-48. Shortly thereafter, he unveiled the Trump administration’s “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) agenda, which aimed to address chronic diseases and childhood health issues. The MAHA Commission was established, tasked with submitting an assessment report on the “childhood chronic disease crisis” within 100 days, along with a strategic plan within 180 days. This initiative underscored a shift in focus towards combatting prevalent health issues such as obesity and diabetes.
As the administration pushed forward with its health agenda, it likewise issued an executive order on February 14 prohibiting federal funds from supporting educational institutions that mandated COVID-19 vaccinations for in-person attendance. By March 2025, all colleges that had implemented such vaccination requirements rescinded them, emphasizing the administration’s influence on public health policy in educational settings.
Policy Revisions and Funding Cuts
Secretary Kennedy outlined several public health priorities during his welcome ceremony at HHS on February 18, including a commitment to investigate the childhood vaccine schedule and tackle perceived corruption within the health sector. However, several sweeping changes followed, including a rule that eliminated public comment requirements for HHS grants and contracts. This modification raised concerns about transparency and public involvement in health policy decisions.
Under Kennedy’s leadership, the CDC announced plans on March 7 to study factors contributing to rising autism rates in the U.S., while no results from this study have been publicly released. These initiatives, alongside the administration’s controversial statements linking childhood vaccinations and autism, reflect a growing political influence over scientific discourse in public health.
funding for critical health programs faced cuts. The NIH announced the termination of several grants for HIV prevention and treatment programs on March 17, which alarmed public health advocates who noted the previous administration’s commitment to combating the HIV epidemic by 2030. The removal of the Surgeon General’s warning on gun violence as a public health crisis further illustrated the administration’s shifting stance on various health issues.
Impact on Health Departments and Research Funding
Amid these policy changes, the HHS sought to retract $11 billion in supplemental COVID-19 funding allocated to state and local health departments. This move prompted legal challenges from multiple states, resulting in a temporary judicial block against the funding cuts. As of August 2025, many states involved in the lawsuit saw a restoration of nearly 80% of the funds initially targeted for cuts, demonstrating the ongoing struggle between state and federal public health priorities.
The reorganization of HHS, announced on March 27, aimed to consolidate several offices to create an “Administration for a Healthy America.” This restructuring included eliminating 20,000 positions across HHS, significantly impacting public health staffing and operational capabilities. Following this announcement, lawsuits emerged challenging the legality of mass firings and the overall restructuring plan.
Changes in Vaccine Recommendations and Approvals
In addition to staffing changes, significant revisions to vaccine recommendations were implemented. On May 27, Secretary Kennedy announced that the CDC would no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccines for healthy pregnant women and children, a departure from established vaccination protocols. This decision prompted a backlash from medical organizations and led to multiple lawsuits against HHS, asserting that the changes did not follow proper federal procedures.
the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) underwent a complete overhaul when Kennedy dismissed all sitting members on June 9, citing a need to restore public trust. New appointees included individuals with previous criticisms of COVID-19 vaccines, signaling a shift in the advisory body’s composition and potentially its recommendations.
As part of a broader strategy to address chronic disease, the MAHA Commission published a report on September 9 that outlined over 120 initiatives aimed at combating childhood chronic diseases. This ambitious plan aimed to reshape federal health priorities and included measures to reform dietary guidelines and enhance public awareness about health risks.
By late 2025, the administration’s actions, including changes to vaccine schedules and funding cuts to health programs, had sparked significant debate within the public health community, raising questions about the future direction of health policy in the United States.
As the Trump administration continues to navigate public health policy through 2026, the implications of these actions remain to be fully realized. Stakeholders from various sectors are closely monitoring the situation, as legal challenges and public discourse evolve in response to these changes.
For more insights into public health policies and their implications, readers are encouraged to engage in the conversation by sharing their thoughts and experiences in the comments below.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice.