Amid scrutiny over Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s pledge to transfer his financial interest in vaccine lawsuits to his family, legal experts have criticized the move but note that Kennedy’s approach is not significantly different from actions taken by other public officials in the past.

During Kennedy’s confirmation hearings last week, the potential next secretary of Health and Human Services was probed over his financial stake in personal-injury lawsuits tied to vaccines, in particular his ties to a suit against pharmaceutical company Merck and its Gardasil cervical cancer vaccine. While Kennedy would not initially commit to letting go of his stake against Merck, he reversed course in a written response to lawmakers’ questions following a hearing, noting he would amend his pledge and ‘will divest my interest in any such litigation via an assignment to my non-dependent, adult son.’

While some legal experts have argued the move does not go far enough to quash potential conflicts for Kennedy, others say this approach is akin to that taken by several other public officials who have found themselves in a similar situation. Meanwhile, one legal expert suggested to Fox News Digital that the pass from Kennedy to his son ‘is more than sufficient to meet any ethical concerns.’

‘That may comply with ordinary conflict of interest issues,’ Jim Copland, director of legal policy at the Manhattan Institute, said. ‘I just don’t think the head of the Department of Health and Human Services has any business being involved in any way with litigation against Merck.’ 

Fellow Manhattan Institute legal expert Ilya Shapiro said he is unsure whether Kennedy’s move will suffice in avoiding any real conflict, but added that he did recognize ‘it’s not unusual in light of past examples.’ 

Both Democrats and Republicans have used family to shield themselves from ethics complaints related to their personal business dealings, with former President Joe Biden being a recent and notable example after a multi-year probe into his family business dealings that found both his son and brother were engaged in risky business relationships with foreign entities, such as China. Biden has repeatedly denied his involvement in those business dealings.

Former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi similarly sought to defend her family’s business dealings after it was revealed her husband was making money investing in companies that had business in front of his wife. In response to questions from reporters about whether she agreed with efforts to ban federal lawmakers’ spouses from trading in stocks, Pelosi replied that ‘they should be able to participate in that.’

Other notable figures who have used their families to shield their personal business dealings include President Donald Trump, who handed over control of his Trump Organization business empire to his sons, and the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein, whose investor husband, Richard Blum, managed investments through his firm Blum Capital Partners that often intersected with his wife’s work while she was in Congress.

‘It is my opinion that RFK, Jr.’s plan to pass on any financial stake in possible vaccine injuries to his son is more than sufficient to meet any ethical concerns,’ Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, told Fox News Digital. ‘This is particularly true because of the limitations imposed by federal law on any claims made against vaccine manufacturers that severely limit possible compensation for anyone claiming a vaccine was somehow defective.’

Spakovsky posited that the federal government’s National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, which prohibits civil litigation against drugmakers and instead directs the federal government to administer any vaccine-injury payments, serves to buffer the impact Kennedy could potentially have on vaccine-related injury payments. 

‘RFK would have no authority whatsoever [over this program],’ he said. ‘The point is that all of this is so disconnected from RFK, Jr.’s potential Cabinet position if he is confirmed, that anyone who says this is a ‘serious’ ethics problem is wrong.’

Copland, who agreed with Spakovsky that the vaccine compensation program diminishes much of Kennedy’s advantage, said RFK Jr. could still benefit in an indirect manner. 

‘I think it’s a more concerning conflict of interest than just saying, ‘Oh, you own a lot of equity interest in some company that may incidentally benefit you know,’’ Copland said. ‘I mean, if you had a Defense Department secretary who was a CEO of a major military contractor, and then he passes that off to his son, I think you’d still have a concern about that due to the obvious conflict of interest there, which is different than a sort of ordinary, ‘Oh, I own a company, and it’s going to, incidentally, benefit from the government.”

Fox News legal analyst Andy McCarthy was more critical of Kennedy’s decision to pass off his financial interests to his son, noting that the fact he is ‘struggling to come up with a scheme to retain his stake, rather than doing the obvious right thing by abandoning it, underscores that this is a real conflict of interest.’

‘The comparison to family asset transfers in other contexts is inapposite and, in any event, misses the point,’ McCarthy said. ‘Whatever one thinks of President Trump’s arrangements regarding his family business, voters knew about that business and elected him anyway – and the president is not in a position to recuse himself from executive decision-making based on conflicts of interest. By contrast, Kennedy wasn’t elected by anyone.’

McCarthy added that after years ‘of justifiably complaining that President Biden was corruptly enriched by payments… made to his son and brother,’ he finds it hard to believe ‘that Republicans can turn a blind eye to a financial stake, which would create a significant conflict of interest for RFK Jr. as HHS secretary, on the pretext that he plans to transfer the stake to his son.’

The Trump administration is revamping agency websites to be rid of climate change-filled content, amid a widespread rebranding of federal departments from content deemed as not aligning with President Donald Trump’s agenda.

Since taking office two weeks ago, Trump has ordered federal departments to remove particular content from their websites, including mentions of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and ‘gender ideology.’

A Fox News Digital review found that climate change pages on both the Forest Service and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) websites appear to be down and are not currently functioning. When accessed, the pages are blank with only the statement, ‘You are not authorized to access this page.’

The scrub comes after it was reported that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) ordered officials to review references to climate change on their websites.

Additionally, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not list climate change on the drop bar of its ‘environmental topics.’ Climate and climate change are still referenced on some parts of the website, but they are linked or mentioned on the homepage.

The scrubbing comes after the Trump administration put a short pause on most federal government websites on Friday evening in an effort to eliminate DEI, Fox News Digital previously reported.

The move mirrors a similar rebranding of government websites during Trump’s first term, where he also removed references to climate change or climate change effects from several federal departments online pages.

Trump targeted the Biden administration’s green energy agenda in his first slew of executive orders, withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement, getting rid of the electric vehicle (EV) mandate, and doing away with its climate emissions target. 

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House, USDA and EPA for comment.

Fox News Digital’s Brooke Singman contributed to this report.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed that he is now the acting director of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

During his five-nation trip to Central America, Rubio announced the development to reporters while taking questions from the press at a maintenance firm, Aeroman, in San Luis Talpa, El Salvador. 

Rubio said his frustration with USAID goes back to his time in Congress, describing the agency as ‘completely unresponsive.’ It is supposed to respond to policy directives at the State Department ‘and it refuses to do so,’ the secretary said, adding: ‘there are a lot of functions of USAID that are going to continue, that are going to be a part of American foreign policy, but it has to be aligned with American foreign policy.’ 

During his confirmation hearing, Rubio recalled, he said that ‘every dollar that we spend and every program that we fund will be aligned with the national interests of the United States, and USAID has a history of sort of ignoring that and deciding that they’re somehow a global charity separate from the national interest.’ 

‘These are taxpayer dollars. And so I’m very troubled by these reports that they have been unwilling to cooperate with people who are asking simple questions about what does this program do, who gets the money, who are our contractors, who’s funded,’ Rubio said. ‘And that sort of insubordination makes it impossible to conduct the sort of mature and serious review that I think foreign aid at large should have.’ 

‘We’re spending taxpayer money here. These are not donor dollars,’ Rubio continued. ‘These are taxpayer dollars, and we owe the American people the assurances that every dollar that we are spending abroad is being spent on something that furthers our national interests. And so far, a lot of the people who work at USAID have simply refused to cooperate.’ 

Asked if he was currently in charge of USAID, Rubio said, ‘I’m the acting director of USAID. I’ve delegated that authority to someone, but I stay in touch with him.’ 

‘And again, our goal was to allow our foreign aid to the national interest,’ Rubio said. ‘But if you go to mission after mission, and embassy after embassy around the world, you will often find that in many cases USAID is involved in programs that run counter to what we’re trying to do and our national strategy with that country or that region. That cannot continue. USAID is not an independent, non-governmental entity. It is an entity that spends taxpayer dollars, and it needs to spend it, as the statute says, in alignment with the policy directives that they get from the Secretary of State, the National Security Council and the president.’ 

‘It’s been 20 or 30 years where people have tried to reform it. And it refuses to reform, it refuses to cooperate with people. When we were in Congress we couldn’t even get answers to basic questions about programs,’ he said. ‘That will not continue.’ 

USAID staffers were instructed earlier Monday to stay out of the agency’s Washington headquarters after Elon Musk announced President Donald Trump had agreed with him to shut the agency. 

Thousands of USAID employees already had been laid off and programs shut down in the two weeks since Trump took office. USAID staffers also said more than 600 additional employees had reported being locked out of the aid agency’s computer systems overnight. Those still in the system received emails saying that ‘at the direction of Agency leadership’ the headquarters building ‘will be closed to Agency personnel on Monday, Feb. 3.’ The agency’s website can no longer be reached. 

Democratic lawmakers have protested the moves, saying Trump lacks constitutional authority to shut down USAID without congressional approval and decrying Musk’s accessing sensitive government-held information through his Trump-sanctioned inspections of federal government agencies and programs.

‘This is a corrupt abuse of power that is going on,’ Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said at a rally with agency supporters and other Democratic lawmakers in front of the USAID building. ‘As my colleague said, it’s not only a gift to our adversaries, but trying to shut down the Agency for International Development by executive order is plain illegal.’

In the Oval Office on Monday, Trump addressed concerns about the access granted to Musk, who leads the Department of Government Efficiency.

‘Elon can’t do and won’t do anything without our approval. And we’ll give him the approval where appropriate. Where not appropriate, we won’t,’ Trump said.

Rubio traveled to El Salvador on Monday after spending two days in Panama. 

Before his departure, he observed from the tarmac a repatriation flight carrying 32 men and 11 women back to Colombia after they had crossed the Darien Gap and were stopped in Panama.

The State Department said such deportations send a strong message of deterrence and that the U.S. has provided Panama with financial assistance to the tune of almost $2.7 million in flights and tickets.

‘Mass migration is one of the great tragedies in the modern era,’ Rubio said, speaking afterward in a nearby building. ‘It impacts countries throughout the world. We recognize that many of the people who seek mass migration are often victims and victimized along the way, and it’s not good for anyone.’

His trip comes amid a sweeping freeze in U.S. foreign assistance and stop-work orders that have shut down U.S.-funded programs, including in Central American countries. The State Department said Sunday that Rubio had approved waivers for certain critical programs in countries he is visiting, but details of those were not immediately available.

Trump has been threatening action against nations that will not accept flights of their nationals from the United States, and he briefly hit Colombia with penalties last week for initially refusing to accept two flights. Panama has been more cooperative and has allowed flights of third-country deportees to land and send migrants back before they reach the United States.

Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino agreed Sunday to withdraw from China’s Belt and Road development and infrastructure initiative after Rubio warned him to reduce China’s role in canal operations or face American retaliation.

‘What I expressed to President Molina, who, look, he is a friend of America,’ Rubio said later Monday from El Salvador. ‘Panama is a strong partner, an ally of the United States. As the president has articulated, when we turned over the canal, we turned it over to Panama. We didn’t turn it over to China. So you get there and the Chinese control both entries to the port.’ 

‘We have a treaty obligation to protect the canal if it comes under attack. But our navy is paying fees to go through there,’ he continued. ‘So I expressed frustration about those things. And again, I understand that it’s a delicate issue in Panama. We don’t want to have a hostile or a negative relationship with Panama. I don’t believe we do. But we had a frank and respectful conversation, and I hope it’ll yield fruits and result in the days to come.’

Rubio added that Panama has ‘been a great partner’ in slowing down the rate of migration coming across Darien Gap.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.