WASHINGTON — U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is facing renewed political pressure after newly released records prompted Democratic lawmakers and a government watchdog to call for an investigation into whether he made false statements to Congress about the purpose of a 2019 trip to Samoa.
Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said he intends to press Republican senators to support a criminal referral to the Department of Justice.
The controversy follows reporting by The Guardian and the Associated Press based on correspondence obtained through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The records have renewed scrutiny of statements Kennedy made during his Senate confirmation process about his activities in Samoa.
Kennedy visited the Pacific island nation in 2019 while he was leading an organization known for challenging established vaccine policy. His visit came months before Samoa experienced a devastating measles outbreak that infected thousands of people and killed 83, most of them young children.
During Kennedy’s confirmation hearings, senators questioned him about the trip and whether it was connected to vaccines.
Wyden and Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey were among those who pressed Kennedy on the issue. Kennedy told lawmakers that the trip had “nothing to do with vaccines.”
Newly disclosed correspondence, however, has raised questions about that characterization.
In one letter to Samoa’s prime minister, Kennedy discussed an interest in studying the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine in the country. According to reports about the newly obtained documents, the letter repeatedly referred to vaccines and vaccination.
The apparent discrepancy has led Wyden to argue that Kennedy’s testimony deserves criminal scrutiny.
Wyden said he plans to urge the Republican-controlled Senate to refer the matter to the Justice Department. He also indicated that Kennedy could face greater congressional scrutiny if Democrats regain control of the Senate.
The calls for an investigation are not limited to Congress.
Government watchdog American Oversight has also asked the Justice Department to examine whether Kennedy violated federal law by making false statements to lawmakers.
The dispute carries potentially serious legal implications. Making knowingly false statements to Congress can constitute a federal crime even when a witness is not formally under oath.
Kennedy was not under oath when he made the statements during his confirmation hearings. Wyden’s office, however, has argued that this distinction would not necessarily prevent prosecution if investigators concluded that knowingly false statements had been made.
Whether such an investigation would actually move forward under the current administration is another question.
Josh Chafetz, a Georgetown University Law Center professor specializing in law and politics, told The Guardian that lying to Congress can be a crime regardless of whether testimony is given under oath. He also noted that prosecution would depend on action by the executive branch.
The newly released documents have intensified broader Democratic criticism of Kennedy’s leadership at the Department of Health and Human Services.
Markey described the controversy as part of what he sees as a larger pattern involving Kennedy’s statements about vaccines.
He argued that the correspondence contradicts Kennedy’s previous assertion that his Samoa trip had nothing to do with vaccination and said Kennedy should no longer lead the federal health department.
Senator Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland, who serves on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, has similarly renewed calls for Kennedy to resign or be removed from office.
Hawaii Governor Josh Green, a physician who traveled to Samoa during the 2019 measles crisis to assist with the response, also called for Kennedy’s resignation.
Green said he believes the newly disclosed information shows Kennedy misled lawmakers about both his intentions in Samoa and his position on vaccines.
The controversy centers on a particularly painful chapter in Samoa’s recent history.
The country’s 2019 measles epidemic resulted in more than 5,000 reported infections in a population of roughly 200,000 at the time. Eighty-three people died, with young children accounting for the overwhelming majority of fatalities.
The outbreak occurred amid severely reduced vaccination rates, making questions surrounding vaccine messaging in Samoa particularly sensitive.
However, Kennedy and the Department of Health and Human Services have strongly rejected allegations that he misled Congress.
In a previously issued statement responding to reporting about the correspondence, HHS maintained that Kennedy’s Samoa visit was unrelated to vaccines and rejected suggestions that the letters prove he lied to lawmakers.
The department characterized allegations that Kennedy lied under oath or to Congress as false and defamatory.
That denial establishes what could become an increasingly consequential dispute: whether Kennedy’s correspondence demonstrates that vaccines were a purpose of the trip, or whether the letters can be reconciled with his testimony that the visit itself had “nothing to do with vaccines.”
The legal threshold would also involve more than establishing that two statements appear inconsistent. Any criminal case would generally require prosecutors to establish the elements of the applicable federal false-statements law, including whether a statement was knowingly and materially false.
For now, there is no indication that the Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation based on the lawmakers’ demands.
The issue could nevertheless follow Kennedy beyond the current political moment.
Federal law generally provides a five-year statute of limitations for certain false-statement offenses. Because Kennedy’s disputed statements were made during his confirmation process, the potential legal window could extend into a future presidential administration.
Democrats could also pursue congressional avenues if they regain control of either chamber. Those options could include additional hearings, investigations and potentially other proceedings examining Kennedy’s conduct and statements to Congress.
The dispute therefore reaches beyond what Kennedy said about a trip made several years ago.
It raises a larger question confronting one of America’s most powerful public-health officials: whether his description of his past vaccine-related activities can withstand scrutiny from the documents he wrote himself.