The Firing of CDC Director Susan Monarez: How Politics Might Undermine Scientific Integrity

The CDC’s Tom Harkin Global Communications Center in Atlanta, Georgia.

In a world infected with political polarization and gridlock, only a few stories have highlighted the clash between science and policy. One such story is the White House, working with Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., firing Susan Monarez, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Science and policy are two intertwined things: they both influence and shape the other. Therefore, understanding how political polarization and policies affect science in the labs is crucial to creating an effective and informed government.

Backstory

Once Susan Monarez was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on July 29, 2025 as the new CDC director, she became the first CDC director, in over 70 years, to hold a PhD instead of a medical degree (MD). However, less than a month into her tenure as the new CDC director, her role ended abruptly on August 27, as the Trump Administration and RFK Jr., unsatisfied with the conflict of their goals for America’s future, removed her from the position. While the final decision itself came from the White House, it is reported that Monarez was fired primarily due to heavy involvement, convincing, and pressure from RFK Jr.

The conflicts in beliefs between Monarez and RFK Jr. came from one main topic: vaccinations. Susan Monarez has stated that her dismissal came as a result of her refusal to endorse rollbacks of COVID-19 vaccine recommendations, as well as refusing to replace the CDC advisory panel with Kennedy-appointed, anti-vaccine individuals. 

Because of this alleged reason, Monarez’s legal team has been trying hard to challenge the firing’s legality, stating that as a Senate-confirmed official, only the Executive Branch (the President) has the power to remove her from office. They are arguing that even Trump’s White House personnel or subordinate officials like RFK Jr. don’t have the authority to fire her. Rather, if she is to be fired, the decision must come directly from the President himself. Despite the huge amount of backlash created by Monarez’s firing, President Donald J. Trump has not responded to the case yet. 

The Public Backlash

The backlash was swift and widespread. In protest of Monarez’s wrongful dismissal, four senior CDC officials—Debra Houry, Demetre Daskalakis, Daniel Jernigan, and Jennifer Layden—all resigned. Daskalakis, now former Director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Disease, cited that he left not only because of Monarez’s firing, but also because he “only sees harm coming” under RFK Jr.’s leadership. 

The backlash doesn’t stop there, however. Many officials within the American government have been calling RFK Jr. out for his “anti-science” purge. For instance, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) called for a formal congressional hearing, while Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) urged for RFK Jr.’s immediate removal, stating, “We cannot let RFK Jr. burn what’s left of the CDC…he must be fired”. 

The protest of Susan Monarez’s firing hasn’t just been confined to the executive level, as dozens of ordinary employees at Atlanta’s CDC campus had staged a walkout in solidarity with the departing directors of the CDC. 

Despite all of the criticism RFK Jr. has experienced from his decision, he has since only doubled down on his decision, saying that the CDC suffered from endemic “malaise” and needed an overhaul to embody “gold standard science” again. His moves have included reviewing every vaccine recommendation with panels that mostly consist of anti-vaxxers, removing educational content that labeled abortion and contraception as “top public health achievements”, and reducing protections for the disabled that were implemented for the public after COVID-19. 

RFK Jr. wishes to take such drastic steps because he believes that the CDC has fundamentally been ineffective, claiming that the agency’s missteps in COVID-19 testing, vaccinations, and school closures had only worsened the crisis. To support this claim, he cites his beliefs that the CDC has been corrupt—despite no evidence reporting so—in order to defend his actions. 

Historically, disputes of this type have triggered constitutional tests and reexaminations of leaders. For example, when Andrew Johnson attempted to remove Edwin Stanton, the Secretary of War at the time, without congressional approval, he got impeached. To this day, Senate-confirmed positions hold special protections against such attempted removals. 

RFK Jr.’s actions stem from one of the core beliefs he had built his political platform on: anti-vaccination. RFK Jr. currently sees vaccination as a danger to the health of Americans, citing research that it causes autism and mental health disorders. RFK Jr.’s campaign, called Make America Healthy Again, has wrongly been used to motivate hundreds of thousands of families to become “healthier,” while simultaneously dismantling their trust in vaccinations. 

Overall, RFK Jr.’s push to fire Susan Monarez, with the help of the White House, has proved that scientific guidance is no longer safe from the ideological and political changes happening under President Donald J. Trump’s administration. Demetre Daskalakis, who was one of the key officials who left the CDC, warned that his resignation is just a harbinger of the political threats to unbiased science and the fight for scientific integrity. 

Why Does This Matter so Much?

RFK Jr. at his Senate confirmation hearing on January 30, 2025 (via nytimes.com).

Because this case holds high-stakes implications for public health and governance, it is much more striking compared to the other stories coming out of Washington, D.C., these days. First, because the CDC has historically operated with a buffer of independence and protection from the federal government, in order to protect science from being influenced by politics, this move from RFK Jr. threatens to allow politics to control the nature of the CDC. Not only that, it also sets an example for those seeking to take further political control of science. Trust in the CDC has already fallen considerably since the onset of COVID-19, and actions akin to this decision will only cause public trust to go down more.

The firing of Susan Monarez, which many have called unjust and dangerous, has raised an important question in the current political climate: will independent STEM organizations be able to work in an unbiased and effective manner even during times of political overreach?

The stakes of this battle are clear because the lives of millions of people will be impacted in the future if RFK Jr.—or other officials like him—continues to get his way and does not realize the consequences of his actions. Encouraging a system where politics control “independent” scientific pursuits only serves as proof of the diminishing integrity of science. Congress, the courts, and society all need to respond decisively and use America’s system of checks and balances effectively to ensure that this event, considering its erosion of trust and integrity, will not be repeated again.