Recent budget cuts have posed a threat to public health, particularly affecting the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Central to this issue is the landmark case of New York v. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., which highlights the critical role of HHS and the potentially devastating consequences of dismantling the nation’s health infrastructure.
Understanding the Case
Filed on May 5, 2025, New York v. Kennedy unites twenty attorneys general in a lawsuit seeking to prevent drastic funding reductions proposed by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. The 101-page complaint meticulously details how each division of HHS—including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)—is essential for public health and safety. Just days later, on May 9, the attorneys general sought a preliminary injunction to block the cuts, emphasizing HHS’s legal obligations.
The motion states:
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is mandated by law to promote the health and well-being of all Americans through the regulation and advancement of medicine, public health, and social services. Generations of public servants have dedicated themselves to this mission, enabling countless Americans to lead longer, healthier, and more stable lives.
The lawsuit asserts that Secretary Kennedy “ignored these laws and the public health progress they support” when he announced plans on March 27 to terminate 10,000 HHS employees and shut down numerous agencies under his directive to “Make America Healthy Again.” The plaintiffs say his plan is illegal because it disregards the law and public health imperatives, thereby jeopardizing the nation’s health infrastructure.
The Broad Impact of HHS Funding Cuts
The proposed funding cuts threaten not just federal offices but also communities, families, and individuals nationwide. Key areas at risk include:
- Preventive Health Services: Cuts to CDC operations jeopardize critical programs that respond to infectious disease outbreaks and public health emergencies.
- Medical Research: Reduced NIH funding would hinder innovation and delay vital advancements in treatments for various diseases.
- Mental Health Support: HRSA budget reductions could dismantle essential mental health and substance abuse programs, exacerbating existing public health crises.
Commercial Tobacco Control Under Threat
Recent funding cuts to the CDC’s Office on Smoking and Health (OSH) and the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) are concerning because these agencies were established to protect us from the dangers of commercial tobacco. OSH works to reduce smoking rates and prevent tobacco-related deaths, but now it has needed to stop collecting health data and scale back many of its programs simply because too few people are available to get the job done. The CTP, which is responsible for keeping tobacco out of kids' hands and ensuring that new tobacco products are safe, is also being forced to slow down, jeopardizing decades of progress.
Why This Case Matters
This lawsuit underscores the interconnectedness of the public health system. Each HHS agency plays a vital, often irreplaceable role; weakening the links can lead to severe consequences, endangering lives and diminishing the nation’s capacity to respond to emerging health threats.
Staying Informed and Engaged
As legal challenges to public health escalate, it is important for professionals, policymakers, and the public to remain informed and engaged. New York v. Kennedy exemplifies the high stakes involved in these issues. For more information, review the full complaint and track developments in the Public Health Law Center’s Litigation Tracker.
Willow Anderson, Senior Staff Attorney
May 20, 2025