This article, about Robert F Kennedy Jr’s plans for the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, was written by Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Professor of Law at the University of California Law, San Francisco, who is a frequent contributor to this and many other websites, providing in-depth and intellectually stimulating articles about vaccines, medical issues, social policy, and the law.

Professor Reiss writes extensively about the social and legal aspects of vaccination in law journals. Reiss is also a member of the Parent Advisory Board of Voices for Vaccines. This parent-led organization supports and advocates for on-time vaccination and the reduction of vaccine-preventable diseases. She is also a member of the Vaccines Working Group on Ethics and Policy.

This post is in response to an X (formerly Twitter) post from HHS Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr regarding his beliefs and plans for the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). This is a follow-up to a previous post that discusses what RFK Jr might be planning for the program.

Response to Kennedy and the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

On July 28, 2025, Secretary Kennedy made claims on Twitter/X about the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Kennedy claimed the program was “broken” and said he would fix it.

As is typical, Secretary Kennedy misrepresented the facts in several ways. This post responds to Secretary Kennedy’s claims in his tweet, and it should be read together with the previous post about Kennedy’s intention.

First, when the Secretary talked about the government’s resources versus the plaintiffs, did he think a plaintiff would be better off facing a pharmaceutical company’s resources?

Second, when Kennedy uses the term “unavoidably unsafe” to argue that vaccines are dangerous – when he says that “vaccines, like all medicines, are, in the words of the American Academy of Pediatrics case, “unavoidably unsafe,” and that a percentage of vaccinated children will suffer injuries or death” – he is misusing a legal term of art, a badly chosen one.

“Unavoidably unsafe” does not mean the product is unusually dangerous – it’s reserved for products whose benefits far outweigh their risks, and that, for that reason, are not subject to strict liability, but are examined under a negligence framework. I addressed the anti-vaccine misuse of the term a long time ago, here.

Third, when Secretary Kennedy presents the special masters as corrupt and in the hands of the government, he is misrepresenting their appointment and actions. The Special Masters are appointed by the Court of Federal Claims — not by HHS — exactly to make them independent from government, and they are in fact independent. If you read their decisions (for example, the Omnibus Autism Decision), agree or not, they are thorough, careful, and take the evidence seriously.

Fourth, Kennedy ignores the real advantages claimants get in vaccine court compared to a regular court, including easier requirements in terms of proving causality, more flexible rules of evidence, lawyer fees and costs covered, and no contingency fee.

Fifth, the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) is a database of private medical information of private people; the limits on access to it are to protect medical privacy. If Secretary Kennedy intends to let lawyers, without those limits, into the database, the owners of the data would likely close access. You can’t just open many people’s medical files to lawyers in unrelated cases; however, many anti-vaccine activists want to make that private information public. Kennedy has been trying to get at that data in other ways.

Sixth, here is the program’s data. Almost half the claims filed in the past were compensated, but that number is skewed by, for example, 5,000 cases dismissed (rightly) in the Omnibus Autism Proceeding (OAP). If you look at recent years, on p. 7, from, say, 2014 and on (the OAP was 2009-2010, but the fallout lasted a few more years), the vast majority of cases are compensated. Thus, Kennedy’s claim misrepresents what has happened over the past 10 years

Seventh, the Omnibus Autism Proceeding was a very thorough, in-depth review, with several appellate courts examining the data, and they found no link between vaccines and autism. Secretary Kennedy is unhappy about the result, but that’s not a problem with the program; it’s his bias.

Eighth, if you want to shorten the time for decisions, more special masters should be appointed. Secretary Kennedy is not calling for that. To be fair, he can’t do it himself; he needs Congress on board. But that’s the way to get somewhere.

Summary

Kennedy said nothing about the concrete steps he wants to take. Even in a video with Charlie Kirk, the only concrete thing he said is that he wants more discovery, and he wants to shorten processing time. That’s not helpful.

First, these two things contradict. More discovery will mean cases take longer.

Second, it’s also not clear that it’s needed here. If all you need to show is causation based on science, what is discovery for? The special masters already have authority to order discovery where needed; it’s just that most cases do not need it.

Third, and again, if you want faster times, you want more special masters. Where is he calling for that?

Finally, the program has actually made strides towards making the process faster without Secretary Kennedy’s help. Maybe he has concrete ideas on that, but he hasn’t, so far, shared them, so we do not know what he is planning.

There are improvements needed to the program, but that’s not what the Secretary wants to do. He wants to serve the anti-vaccine agenda by making the program compensate cases not caused by the vaccines. That’s not going to make it better. It’s also not as if the program is in horrible shape — it does quite a few things well.

There’s also at least a good argument that Secretary Kennedy’s X post is not just to legitimize gutting the program, but also to help promote anti-vaccine views.

First, by undermining trust in the program, he is feeding into the idea that the vaccine apparatus is corrupt and into fears.

Second, he may also be creating this mistrust to support Representative Gosar’s effort to abolish the program by filing a new bill in the House.

At any rate, all Kennedy has done so far is attack the program with a list of inaccurate claims, without proposing any concrete, helpful reforms. This does not increase trust in his ability to improve it.