Children’s Health Defense Hits AAP With RICO Suit Over Fraudulent Vaccine Safety Claims

January 21, 2026 › Big Pharma › Health Conditions › News

Legal

Breaking: Children’s Health Defense Hits AAP With RICO Suit Over Fraudulent Vaccine Safety Claims

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and five other plaintiffs today accused the American Academy of Pediatrics of running a decades-long racketeering scheme to defraud American families about the safety of the childhood vaccine schedule. CHD filed the RICO suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

by Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D.Brenda Baletti, Ph.D.

January 21, 2026

In a lawsuit filed today in federal court, Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and five other plaintiffs accused the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) of running a decades-long racketeering scheme to defraud American families about the safety of the childhood vaccine schedule.

The suit alleges that the AAP violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) by making “false and fraudulent” claims about the safety of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) childhood immunization schedule — while receiving funding from vaccine manufacturers and providing financial incentives to pediatricians who achieve high vaccination rates.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA



COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES


CLAIMS FOR RELIEF 

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
VIOLATION OF RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c)

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE RICO (18 U.S.C. § 1962(D))


CONCLUSION

183. For over twenty-five years, the AAP has told parents, physicians, and policymakers that the childhood vaccine schedule is safe, even though no one had ever studied whether vaccines created a net benefit or harm to children. The AAP’s sleight-of-hand was to pass-off the apparatus of data collection as proof of safety. The fraud is that it looked like science: VAERS sounds like surveillance, but is a passive, woefully under-reporting system that was never designed to establish causation. The VSD sounds like a safety monitoring system, but it is just a giant digital filing cabinet.

184. When the IOM twice told the CDC to analyze the files in the filing cabinet, AAP's deflection sounded like ethics, claiming prospective studies with an unvaccinated control group would be unethical, even though the IOM specifically rejected such studies in favor of analysis of existing records. And AAP dismissed as methodologically flawed every study that found unvaccinated children healthier. The strategy was to mischaracterize unanalyzed safety systems as proof of the safety of the vaccine schedule, to sell more vaccines.

185. The AAP's January 2026 conduct strips away any remaining pretense. AAP calls reducing the CDC schedule down to eleven vaccines "dangerous" — one more than California and Massachusetts require. The inconsistency is dispositive. AAP's position is about control and revenue, not childhood safety.

186. AAP claims that recent federal changes to vaccine schedule policy endanger children. The real threat is to member revenue. AAP is presenting these concerns to a Massachusetts federal court, where they should be recognized for what they are: the latest predicate acts in a quarter-century racketeering enterprise.

VII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that upon trial of this action, the Court enter judgment in their favor and against Defendant, and grant the following relief: Declaratory Relief: A declaration that no studies have established the safety of the entire childhood immunization schedule; that the specific representations and omissions detailed in Section I of this Complaint are materially false and misleading; and that Defendant's broader claims (including that the schedule is “fully tested and proven safe,” vaccines are categorically “safe and effective,” questioning physicians spread “misinformation,” and pediatricians “lose money on vaccines”) are predicate acts under RICO.

Injunctive Relief: An injunction requiring Defendant to publish corrective statements in vaccine-related publications (e.g., the Red Book and HealthyChildren.org) disclosing the lack of comprehensive safety testing and insurer incentive programs, and prohibiting further unqualified safety claims without such disclosures.

Damages: Treble damages under 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c) for economic injuries to business or property suffered by Plaintiffs Shaw, Nelson, Doe, Thomas, and Stoller.

Attorneys’ Fees and Costs: An award of reasonable attorneys’ fees, expert fees, and costs pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c), and such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

Dated January 21, 2026