Susan Monarez’s brief term as CDC chief culminated in a showdown with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on vaccine matters, which resulted in her ousting and multiple resignations of senior CDC officials.
Background and Senate confirmation
A bona-fide infectious-disease scientist within the federal government, Susan Monarez became the 21st director of the CDC on July 31, 2025—now the first Senate-confirmed director under a new law in 2023 that requires confirmation for the post, and President Trump nominated her. “Vaccines save lives,” she said at her confirmation hearing; she also refuted any link of vaccination to autism spectrum disorder, thus putting her in direct contradiction with Kennedy and his vaccine skepticism. Appointing her as director was seen as a boost for the CDC’s integrity of science.
Conflict with RFK Jr. and vaccine policy
Almost immediately, Monarez was pitted against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a vocal opponent of vaccines, after he revoked federal guidance on COVID inoculation for healthy children and pregnant women in May 2025. Said sources allege Kennedy demanded Monarez’s approval for a multitude of “unscientific, reckless directives” meant to minimize or censor critical vaccines-something she would not rubber-stamp. Allegedly, during an August 25 meeting, Kennedy told Monarez to resign or await termination for not supporting what he called the “Making America Healthy Again” agenda of President Trump.
Firing and fighting bias
On August 27, HHS announced via social media that Monarez “is no longer director” of the CDC. Her lawyers, Mark S. Zaid and Abbe David Lowell, immediately contradicted the claims by asserting she did not resign and had not been properly terminated, as even the president himself had not been notified. That evening, White House spokesman Kush Desai confirmed her firing, stating it resulted from her refusal to resign after notifying HHS of her intention to do so-a claim her lawyers labeled “legally deficient” and lacking presidential authority. Monarez’s legal team maintained she would “not resign” because of her commitment to evidence-based public health over political agendas.
Exodus of CDC leadership
Monarez’s exit led to an almost immediate crisis in leadership within the CDC. Within hours, at least four high-ranking officials immediately resigned from what they termed the “weaponization” and politicization of public health:
- Dr. Daniel Jernigan, Director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, cited political interference and budget cuts.
- Dr. Debra Houry, CDC Chief Medical Officer, warned that “science at CDC should never be censored or subject to political interpretation,” lamenting pending layoffs and reorganizational plans.
- Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, the Director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, decried the misuse of the CDC to enact policies “designed to harm rather than enhance public health.”
- According to NBC News, also resigning is Dr. Jen Layden, Director of the Office of Public Health Data, Surveillance and Technology.
- These resignations mark one of the most significant talent drains in the agency’s 79-year history; they underscore serious fissures in senior leadership within the CDC.
Implications for public health
However, in the compelling act of Monarez, quick unraveling of CDC leadership sees a dim future for the agency in the political clash for its ability to respond effectively to newly emerging health threats. This is yet as the cuts of nearly $3.6 billion are being proposed with the earlier layoffs affecting thousands of employees already draining resources from the CDC. Congressional leaders, including HELP Committee Chair Bill Cassidy and Ranking Member Bernie Sanders, have called for oversight hearings to address this crisis in the CDC to help safeguard its scientific mission.
With experts warning that continued politicization may erode public confidence and doom vaccination drives-reflected in a recent resurgence of measles infection to levels last seen 30 years ago-the agency prepares for a critical juncture. As dust settles, Monarez’s stand for scientific integrity may ring as a warning: the integrity of public health institutions relies on leaders willing to resist political meddling for the sake of protecting the nation’s health.
