HHS sued over RFK’s $11B cuts to infectious disease control
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are being sued by a coalition of city and county municipalities over the $11 billion in cuts the agency made to COVID-19 legacy programs, now meant to broadly stop the spread of infectious disease and improve public health.
The plaintiffs from the local governments of Harris County, Texas; Nashville, Tennessee; Columbus, Ohio; and Kansas City, Missouri, have all signed onto the lawsuit, as has the largest labor union for government employees, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME).
Together, they have asked a federal court to force HHS to distribute the promised funds and vacate the agency’s elimination of COVID-19 grant programs. The plaintiffs argue that the money was allocated by Congress, and the job of the executive branch is to ensure the $11 billion is distributed.
The money is to be used for various purposes, including disease reporting, vaccinations for infectious illness, hospital infrastructure upgrades, healthcare worker payroll, wastewater surveillance, and more. The municipalities made it clear in a court filing that they rely on the funds to keep public health workers operating.
As an example, the plaintiffs said in their court filing, “Columbus Public Health cannot upgrade to a modern record-keeping system that allows for providers to easily share critical health and treatment information between different clinics and hospitals.”
Federal judge halts cuts
This new lawsuit mirrors another pending in federal court. In that case, a group of 23 states and Washington, D.C. sued HHS over the pulled funds, as the money was necessary to support regional healthcare initiatives, including curbing the opioid crisis.
A federal judge issued an emergency injunction in early April halting the cuts; however, HHS has not backed down and continues to push to withdraw the funds, citing wasteful government spending. The states said they feared they would have to lay off crucial healthcare workers and close public health programs if they did not receive their share of the promised funding.
Both cases are tied up in federal courts, and the Supreme Court has yet to weigh in.
Chad is an award-winning writer and editor with over 15 years of experience working in media. He has a decade-long professional background in healthcare, working as a writer and in public relations.