Watch the full video, Trump signs executive order updating childhood vaccine recommendations, on CBS News.

Note: This video at over 27 minutes long, is quite extensive and involves a great deal of commentary. Playing the first five to 10 minutes of the video should serve as an excellent “springboard” for discussion of the issue regarding the propriety (and constitutionality) of executive orders.

Discussion Questions

  1. What is the American Medical Association (AMA)? What is the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)? Conduct some research regarding the opinions of the AMA and the AAP related to President Trump’s executive order calling for fewer childhood vaccines.

    The AMA is a national professional organization representing physicians and medical students in the United States. Founded in 1847, the AMA works to advance public health, improve medical education and practice, promote professional standards, and advocate for policies affecting physicians and patients. 

    The AAP is a professional organization of pediatricians and other healthcare professionals dedicated to the health and well-being of infants, children, adolescents, and young adults. Founded in 1930, the AAP develops clinical guidelines, provides education and resources for healthcare professionals, conducts research, and advocates for policies concerning children’s health, safety, and development. 

    Historically, both the AMA and the AAP have played instrumental roles in shaping medical standards, healthcare policy, and public health recommendations in the United States.

    The AMA strongly opposes President Donald Trump’s executive order calling for changes that would reduce or delay routine childhood vaccinations. The AMA has stated that there is “no credible scientific evidence” supporting a change to the existing childhood vaccine schedule, which is based on decades of research and real-world data. 

    The AMA warns that changing the schedule without strong scientific justification could confuse parents, undermine confidence in vaccines, reduce vaccination rates, and expose more children and communities to preventable diseases. 

    The AMA maintains that vaccine decisions should be based on scientific evidence, patient safety, and the expertise of physicians and public-health professionals, rather than political considerations.

    The AAP also strongly opposes President Trump’s executive order, arguing that changes to the immunization schedule should be based on scientific evidence and careful review by medical experts rather than political considerations. 

    The AAP has criticized federal efforts to remove several vaccines from universal childhood recommendations, calling the changes “dangerous and unnecessary,” and warning that they could create confusion among parents, reduce confidence in vaccines, and leave children vulnerable to preventable diseases. 

    The AAP continues to publish its own evidence-based childhood immunization schedule and states that there is no scientific reason to delay or skip recommended vaccinations.

  2. What is the scientific basis for President Trump’s executive order?

    The scientific basis asserted by the Trump administration for reducing the number of routinely recommended childhood vaccines is primarily a January 2026 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) assessment comparing the U.S. childhood immunization schedule with those of other developed countries. 

    The assessment argued that the United States recommends more childhood vaccines than its peer nations and that some countries achieve high vaccination rates with fewer universally recommended vaccines. However, the broader scientific evidence does not establish that fewer vaccines would provide equal protection for American children. Vaccine schedules are designed around factors such as the diseases prevalent in a particular country, the age at which children are most vulnerable, vaccine effectiveness and safety, and the timing of immune-system development. 

    The World Health Organization (WHO) and medical experts have emphasized that differences between countries do not necessarily mean one schedule is scientifically superior because countries face different disease risks and have different healthcare systems. Moreover, claims repeated by President Trump and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. suggesting a connection between vaccines and autism are not supported by the scientific evidence—extensive medical research has found no causal relationship. 

    Thus, while the Trump administration has cited international comparisons, parental choice, and a desire for additional research as reasons for changing the schedule, major medical and public-health organizations say there is no new scientific evidence demonstrating that reducing or spacing out the current childhood vaccine schedule is safer or more effective.

  3. In your reasoned opinion, what role should the scientific community play in crafting health-related public policy and law? 

    This is an opinion question, so student responses may vary. 

    In your author’s opinion, the scientific community should be the “go-to” source in terms of formulating the blueprint for health-related public policy and law. The scientific community has the education, training, and experience to address public health issues, and it is not burdened by the shackles of politics. 

    Although cost considerations can certainly come into play if the government is footing the bill for health care, the actual science behind health-related issues, and the health policy recommendations that come from such science, should be within the realm of the scientific community.