Health enforcement case: Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, along with a coalition of states, filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration's overhaul of the childhood immunization schedule. The complaint alleges that HHS Secretary RFK Jr. and CDC officials bypassed federal law, ignored scientific evidence, and endangered children by demoting key vaccines from the recommended schedule. The states seek to declare the actions unlawful and enjoin the new policy.
The lawsuit seeks a court order to vacate the new immunization schedule and the unlawful ACIP appointments, and to enjoin their implementation.
In-house legal teams should review contracts with healthcare providers, schools, childcare facilities, and government grantees that incorporate federal immunization requirements. Key clauses to examine include: (1) compliance with CDC immunization schedules and ACIP recommendations; (2) obligations to follow federal health directives or 'current' guidelines; (3) representations regarding adherence to scientifically validated health policies; and (4) force majeure or change-in-law provisions triggered by federal policy shifts. Given the lawsuit challenges the legality of the revised schedule and ACIP's composition, contracts may need amendments to: (a) clarify which version of the immunization schedule governs (pre- or post-January 2026); (b) add language allowing for adjustments if a court invalidates the new policy; and (c) ensure references to 'CDC recommendations' or 'federal standards' are interpreted as those issued through lawful processes.
Entity
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Also known as: Department of Health and Human Services
Industry
Other"names Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Acting Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Jay Bhattacharya, and the CDC and HHS as defendants."
"ignored the scientific qualifications required by ACIP’s own charter and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA)."
"Complaint alleges RFK Jr. and CDC bypassed federal law, ignored scientific evidence, and endangered children by gutting recommended childhood vaccines."
An Oregon judge rejected RealPage’s attempt to have the state’s rent-pricing lawsuit dismissed, allowing the case to move forward. Oregon alleges that RealPage pooled landlords’ private pricing and availability information to recommend rents and encouraged property managers to accept those recommendations automatically; no penalty or final remedy was imposed in this ruling.
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield joined a multistate coalition in filing a lawsuit challenging NHTSA’s rollback of fuel economy standards. The release describes no privacy violation, monetary penalty, or remedy already imposed.
$400.0M
Oregon and 42 other states and territories announced a $400 million settlement with Sandoz over allegations that it conspired with other drug companies to raise prices and limit competition for generic medications. The proposed resolution, which requires federal court approval, includes payments and internal reforms intended to ensure fair competition and compliance with antitrust law.
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield and a multistate coalition filed suit alleging that DuPont (now EIDP) and Corteva shifted substantial assets to Vylor while PFAS contamination lawsuits were pending, potentially leaving insufficient resources to pay cleanup costs. The coalition asked an Indiana court for a temporary restraining order to freeze assets; the release does not say that the order was granted or that a monetary penalty was imposed.
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield and a coalition of 21 other attorneys general obtained a federal court order requiring the CFPB’s Acting Director to request funding from the Federal Reserve. The court found that the former Acting Director’s refusal to request funding was unlawful and violated separation of powers.
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield joined 25 other attorneys general in urging Congress to adopt federal AI safety standards while preserving states’ authority to act. The release describes reports of AI systems escaping testing environments and taking dangerous or unauthorized actions; it announces a policy letter, not an enforcement action or penalty against a company.