TruthOrFake Logo
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: Senator questions ethics review of new ACIP members during Senate testimony.

Fact Check: Senator questions ethics review of new ACIP members during Senate testimony.

Published June 25, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
✓
VERDICT
True

# Fact Check: Senator Questions Ethics Review of New ACIP Members During Senate Testimony ## What We Know During a recent Senate Health, Education, L...

Fact Check: Senator Questions Ethics Review of New ACIP Members During Senate Testimony

What We Know

During a recent Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee hearing, Senator Patty Murray raised concerns regarding the ethics review process for newly appointed members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). This discussion was prompted by the actions of HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who had recently fired all 17 existing ACIP members and replaced them with 8 new appointees, many of whom were described as "unvetted" and known vaccine skeptics (Murray Press Release, Purging of CDC Vaccine Advisory Committee). Senator Murray emphasized the importance of an ethics review, stating, "If they have not gone through an ethics approval process, they shouldn’t be participating in the meetings" (Murray Press Release).

Dr. Susan Monarez, the nominee for CDC Director, acknowledged the need for an ethics review for ACIP members before they participate in meetings, reinforcing Senator Murray's concerns about the legitimacy of recommendations made by the new members (Murray Press Release). The abrupt firing of the previous members and the appointment of new ones without a thorough vetting process has raised alarms among several senators regarding the integrity of vaccine recommendations (Purging of CDC Vaccine Advisory Committee).

Analysis

The claim that Senator Murray questioned the ethics review of new ACIP members is substantiated by multiple sources. The context of the hearing indicates that Senator Murray was not only questioning the process but also advocating for the reinstatement of the fired members or a delay in the meeting until the new members were appropriately vetted. This aligns with her broader concerns about public health and vaccine confidence, especially given the controversial background of some of the new appointees (Murray Press Release, Purging of CDC Vaccine Advisory Committee).

The reliability of the sources is high, as they come from official press releases and statements made during a Senate hearing, which are typically well-documented and scrutinized. The involvement of multiple senators, including Senator Murray and Dr. Helen Chu, a former ACIP member, adds credibility to the claims made regarding the ethics review process and the implications of the new appointments (Murray Press Release, Purging of CDC Vaccine Advisory Committee).

However, it is important to note that the political context surrounding these events may introduce some bias. Senator Murray is a vocal critic of Secretary Kennedy, and her statements may reflect her political stance rather than an objective assessment of the situation. Nevertheless, the concerns she raised about the ethics review process are grounded in established protocols for public health decision-making, which have historically emphasized transparency and scientific integrity (Purging of CDC Vaccine Advisory Committee).

Conclusion

The claim that Senator Murray questioned the ethics review of new ACIP members during Senate testimony is True. The evidence from the Senate hearing and subsequent press releases clearly indicates that Senator Murray raised significant concerns about the lack of an ethics review for the newly appointed ACIP members, emphasizing the potential risks to public health and vaccine confidence. The context and statements made during the hearing support the claim, making it a valid assertion.

Sources

  1. At HELP Hearing, Senator Murray Presses CDC Nominee on Commitment to ...
  2. Purging of CDC Vaccine Advisory Committee
  3. Senator Blunt Rochester Calls for Answers on Recent Postponement of ...
  4. Wyden Blasts HHS Secretary Kennedy for Purging All ...
  5. Warnock Demands Transparency from HHS Secretary Kennedy After Abruptly ...
  6. Senator Murray, Former ACIP Member from WA State Raise Alarm Over Purge ...

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: The U.S. Senate consists of 100 members, with each state represented by two senators.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: The U.S. Senate consists of 100 members, with each state represented by two senators.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The U.S. Senate consists of 100 members, with each state represented by two senators.

Jul 1, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Jul 27, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Thom Tillis has served as a U.S. senator since 2015.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Thom Tillis has served as a U.S. senator since 2015.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Thom Tillis has served as a U.S. senator since 2015.

Jul 1, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Senator Thom Tillis will not seek reelection after opposing the bill.
True

Fact Check: Senator Thom Tillis will not seek reelection after opposing the bill.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Senator Thom Tillis will not seek reelection after opposing the bill.

Jun 30, 2025
Read more →
🔍
True

Fact Check: Trump risks his presidency by humiliating his own senator.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Trump risks his presidency by humiliating his own senator.

Jun 30, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Senator Thom Tillis opposes the bill, citing billions in healthcare losses for North Carolina.
True

Fact Check: Senator Thom Tillis opposes the bill, citing billions in healthcare losses for North Carolina.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Senator Thom Tillis opposes the bill, citing billions in healthcare losses for North Carolina.

Jun 30, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks
Fact Check: Senator questions ethics review of new ACIP members during Senate testimony. | TruthOrFake Blog