Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Susan Monarez will tell senators Wednesday that she was fired for "holding the line on scientific integrity," according to copies of her written testimony reviewed by multiple media outlets.
Monarez is expected to directly contradict statements by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who told senators earlier this month that he dismissed her because he found her "not trustworthy." In her prepared remarks, Monarez said Kennedy told her he could not define "trustworthiness" but that he had told her he could not trust her. She said she had refused to commit to approving vaccine recommendations without evidence, to fire career officials without cause, or to resign, and that she had shared those concerns with senators.
Monarez’s appearance comes less than a month after her confirmation to lead the CDC and following a flurry of congressional and internal agency criticism since her abrupt ouster. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed last month that President Donald Trump had fired Monarez, saying the president has authority to remove personnel "who are not aligned with his mission." Kennedy notified senators at a Sept. 4 Senate Finance Committee hearing that changes at the agency were "absolutely necessary adjustments" to restore the CDC to what he described as its core mission of protecting Americans from infectious disease.
An HHS spokesperson, Andrew G. Nixon, issued a statement on Tuesday calling Monarez’s account "inaccurate," saying she was tasked with returning the CDC to its core mission after "decades of bureaucratic inertia, politicized science and mission creep" and that she acted "maliciously to undermine the president’s agenda and was fired as a result." The statement reiterated administration arguments that the agency needed reorientation following criticism of its handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
Monarez’s prepared testimony, however, characterizes her termination as a consequence of resisting directives she viewed as inconsistent with scientific standards. She plans to tell senators she informed the secretary that if he believed he could not trust her, he could fire her. She told the committee that she would not commit to approving vaccine guidance without appropriate evidence and would not carry out partisan firings of career public health officials.
The dispute has prompted internal dissent at HHS. More than 1,000 HHS staffers signed a letter calling on Kennedy to resign, saying his actions had "endangered the nation's health" in the week after Monarez’s firing. The staff letter intensified scrutiny of Kennedy’s leadership at a department that oversees the CDC and other agencies central to pandemic response and public health policy.
Monarez’s nomination and confirmation drew support from both Kennedy and President Trump earlier in the year, with proponents citing her scientific credentials and decades of public service. Her abrupt removal has left Republicans who voted to confirm her publicly expressing frustration at the swift turnover.
Senators on both sides are now likely to press Monarez and administration officials on the sequence of events that led to her dismissal, the extent of any pressure to change scientific recommendations, and the process by which career agency officials are being evaluated or removed. Her testimony is expected to probe whether political considerations influenced public health decisions and to provide the committee a contemporaneous account of internal discussions within HHS and the CDC.
The hearings this week will add to an ongoing examination by Congress into the administration’s approach to federal public health agencies. Lawmakers have questioned whether personnel moves and policy directives under HHS threaten the independence of career scientists who produce guidance on vaccines, outbreaks and other public health priorities. The administration maintains that its actions are intended to restore public trust and refocus agencies on preventing and controlling infectious disease.
Monarez’s testimony will be among several high-profile moments this month in which current and former public health officials, administration figures and congressional panels confront the balance between political oversight and scientific independence at agencies charged with protecting public health.