Susan Monarez, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, testifies during her confirmation hearing before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on June 25, 2025 in Washington, D.C.. (Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention doesn’t appear inclined to leave her post, despite the Trump administration announcing Wednesday that she’s no longer running one of the country’s top public health agencies. 

Attorneys for Susan Monarez, who received Senate confirmation in late July, posted that she hasn’t been fired or resigned, but didn’t announce whether they plan to sue the administration. 

“When CDC Director Susan Monarez refused to rubber-stamp unscientific, reckless directives and fire dedicated health experts she chose protecting the public over serving a political agenda,” wrote Mark S. Zaid and Abbe David Lowell. “For that, she has been targeted. Dr. Monarez has neither resigned nor received notification from the White House that she has been fired, and as a person of integrity and devoted to science, she will not resign.”

The statement from Monarez’s attorneys came just hours after the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the CDC, wrote on social media that she was no longer running the agency. 

“Susan Monarez is no longer director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,” the post stated. “We thank her for her dedicated service to the American people. @SecKennedy has full confidence in his team at@CDCgov who will continue to be vigilant in protecting Americans against infectious diseases at home and abroad.”

The Washington Post first reported the news. 

The U.S. Senate voted along party lines to confirm Monarez as CDC director in late July, giving her just weeks in one of the nation’s top public health roles.

Monarez’s last post on social media from her official account was on Aug. 22, marking the death of a police officer after a gunman opened fire at the CDC’s headquarters in Atlanta. 

“A large group of CDC employees and I attended today’s memorial for Officer David Rose, whose Tour of Duty ended on August 8 when he responded to shots fired,” Monarez wrote. “He leaves behind a legacy of love, courage, and service to the community that will never be forgotten.”

The dispute over Monarez’s position as CDC director appeared to potentially mark the beginning of a wave of resignations from other public health officials, including Director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases Demetre C. Daskalakis.

“I am unable to serve in an environment that treats CDC as a tool to generate policies and materials that do not reflect scientific reality and are designed to hurt rather than to improve the public’s health,” Daskalakis wrote in a lengthy social media post. “The recent change in the adult and children’s immunization schedule threaten the lives of the youngest Americans and pregnant people.”

Monarez second choice after Weldon

Monarez was President Donald Trump’s second choice for CDC director. He originally selected former Florida U.S. Rep. Dave Weldon to run the CDC shortly after he secured election to the Oval Office in November. But the White House pulled Weldon’s nomination in March, after it appeared he couldn’t secure the votes needed for confirmation.

Later that month, Trump announced his plans to nominate Monarez in a social media post.

“Dr. Monarez brings decades of experience championing Innovation, Transparency, and strong Public Health Systems,” Trump wrote. “She has a Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin, and PostDoctoral training in Microbiology and Immunology at Stanford University School of Medicine.

“As an incredible mother and dedicated public servant, Dr. Monarez understands the importance of protecting our children, our communities, and our future. Americans have lost confidence in the CDC due to political bias and disastrous mismanagement. Dr. Monarez will work closely with our GREAT Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert Kennedy Jr. Together, they will prioritize Accountability, High Standards, and Disease Prevention to finally address the Chronic Disease Epidemic and, MAKE AMERICA HEALTHY AGAIN!”

Restoring trust in CDC

Monarez testified in front of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions in June as part of her confirmation process. The committee voted 12-11 in July to send her nomination to the Senate floor, where Republicans approved her to the post later that month. 

Chairman Bill Cassidy, R-La., said during the committee’s markup that he believed Monarez would put science first and help to restore public trust in the agency. 

“The United States needs a CDC director who makes decisions rooted in science, a leader who will reform the agency and work to restore public trust in health institutions,” Cassidy said at the time. “With decades of proven experience as a public health official, Dr. Monarez is ready to take on this challenge.”

The James H. Shannon Building (Building One) on the NIH campus in Bethesda, Maryland. (Photo by Lydia Polimeni,/National Institutes of Health)

President Donald Trump’s freeze on $8 billion of congressionally appropriated funding to the National Institutes of Health was illegal, the Government Accountability Office reported Tuesday.

Orders Trump signed in the early days of his return to office and related administration directives violated the Impoundment Control Act by failing to spend money that Congress, which holds the power of the purse under the Constitution, had approved, the GAO report said.

Roughly 1,800 grants for health research were held up by the administration, the report said.

Trump’s Inauguration Day order ceased funding for a variety of health research grants that related to diversity, equity and inclusion, transgender issues or environmental harms. The Department of Health and Human Services issued a memo directing its agencies, including NIH, to cease publishing notices in the Federal Register of meetings of grant review boards.

GAO, an independent investigatory agency that reports to Congress, called those meetings “a key step in NIH’s grant review process.” HHS has since restarted notices of the meetings.

From February to June, the NIH released $8 billion less than it obligated in the past two years, representing a drop-off of more than one-third, according to the GAO. The gap between 2025 spending and that of previous years continued to grow, GAO said, with NIH obligating a lower amount of grant funding each month.

Illegal impoundment

The failure to fund grant awards violated the Impoundment Control Act and the Constitution, which certified Congress as the branch of government responsible for funding decisions, said GAO.

If a law is passed by Congress and signed by a president, it must be carried out by the executive branch, the watchdog said.

“The President must ‘faithfully execute’ the law as Congress enacts it,” the report said. “Once enacted, an appropriation is a law like any other, and the President must implement it by ensuring that appropriated funds are obligated and expended prudently during their period of availability unless and until Congress enacts another law providing otherwise. … The Constitution grants the President no unilateral authority to withhold funds from obligation.”

There are specific circumstances that allow for a funding freeze — a rescissions law, such as the one Congress passed last month to defund public broadcasters and foreign aid, is one example — but they did not apply to this case, the GAO said.

Delays may be permissible to allow a new presidential administration to ensure grants are awarded based on its priorities. But a complete block on funding is illegal, the GAO said. There is no evidence that other grant awards — or any other type of funding at HHS — took the place of the $8 billion in unspent grant money, the report said.

“While it can be argued that NIH reviewed grants to ensure that funds were spent in alignment with the priorities of the new administration, NIH did not simply delay the planned obligations of the funds,” the GAO said. “Rather, NIH eliminated obligations entirely by terminating grants it had already awarded.”

GAO can sue the executive branch based on its findings. The report noted there is already litigation from other parties over the frozen grants.

Dems call for reinstatement

Congressional Democrats responded to the report by harshly criticizing Trump and White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought and calling for the funds’ release.

“This is simple – Congress passed and the President signed into law investments in NIH research to help find cures and treatments for cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, ALS, diabetes, mental health issues, and maternal mortality,” U.S. House Appropriations Committee ranking Democrat Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut said in a statement. “But now, GAO has determined that President Trump and OMB Director Vought illegally withheld billions in funding for research on diseases affecting millions of American families—research that brings hope to countless people suffering.”

Senate Appropriations Vice Chair Patty Murray, a Washington state Democrat, said in a statement the funding freeze “dangerously set back” efforts to cure cancer, Alzheimer’s and other diseases.

“Today’s decision affirms what we’ve known for months: President Trump is illegally blocking funding for medical research and shredding the hopes of patients across the country who are counting on NIH-backed research to propel new treatments and cures that could save their lives,” Murray said. “It is critical President Trump reverse course, stop decimating the NIH, and get every last bit of this funding out.”

An HHS spokesperson deferred a request for comment Tuesday to OMB.

An agency investigated by the GAO is generally given a draft of the watchdog’s findings and asked to respond.

The HHS response, obtained by States Newsroom, said grant reviews were back on schedule, though it did not address grant obligations.

“Despite the short delay in scheduling and holding peer review and advisory council meetings to allow for the administration transition, NIH has been on pace with its reviewing grant applications and holding meetings and has caught up from the pause when compared to prior years,” the response said.

GAO’s summary of the HHS response said the department had restarted meetings of grant review boards and provided some “factual information” but did not justify the lack of grant spending or provide current status of payments for previously approved grants. 

Nasal Narcan, used to reverse an overdose, stock the inside of Milwaukee County's first harm reduction vending machine. (Photo | Isiah Holmes)

Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley is proposing to utilize over $9 million in opioid settlement funds to support seven initiatives aimed at expanding treatment and reducing opioid use disorder. Crowley said in a statement that his administration “continues to deploy opioid settlement dollars across Milwaukee County.” 

“These upstream investments are proving to be effective,” Crowley said, “but we know there’s more work to do in expanding substance use prevention, harm reduction, treatment, and recovery efforts.” 

The Milwaukee County Board Committee on Finance unanimously approved Crowley’s proposal during a meeting Thursday. Next week, the full county board will vote on whether to approve the plan. The projects, proposed for the 2026-28 fiscal years, include providing outreach to older adults with disabilities through door-to-door canvasing and  funding community-based organizations which partner with the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Providing more staffing to the medical examiner’s office, funding residential room and board programs for people struggling with addiction and enhancing the county’s publicly available data analysis of the overdose crisis are among the other proposed initiatives. 

“Through these proven initiatives and by working together, we will keep leading the way to change the lives of individuals affected by substance use disorder and reduce the likelihood of overdose-related fatalities in our community — because lives depend on it,” Crowley said in a statement. 

Shakita LaGrant-McClain, executive director of DHHS, said the funding will allow the department to “continue the life-saving work that began with the initial round of opioid settlement funds…We are seeing promising trends and look forward to continuing our prevention, harm reduction, treatment and recovery work, including ensuring residents have access to harm reduction supplies, targeted community outreach, and collaboration with community partners.”

A publicly available dashboard illustrates the toll the overdose epidemic has taken on Milwaukee County. It provides information on both fatal and non-fatal overdoses, which communities are most impacted, how much anti-overdose Naloxone has been utilized, and more. Across Milwaukee County, over 4,500 people have lost their lives to an overdose between 2016 and 2024. The deaths peaked in 2022, which saw 674 people lose their lives to an overdose. Non-fatal overdoses are even more common; more than 5,400 occurred during 2022. There have been 1,061 non-fatal overdoses so far this year and 124 people have died of an overdose in 2025. 

The data shows that so far this year, 14% of fatal overdoses have been people between 55-59 years old and 11% were  60-64. People aged 35-39 made up 13% of the fatal overdoses this year. The lowest percentages came from young people 15-29 years old, and much older people aged 75-85 years or more. 

Over 18 years, Milwaukee County will receive a total of $111 million in opioid settlement funds. So far, $34 million has been allocated across three cohorts of funded projects focused on breaking cycles of addiction, advancing racial equality and improving community health.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Reading Time: 4 minutes

The Social Development Commission, or SDC, is asking the federal government to reverse a decision made by the state that could alter the anti-poverty agency’s funding options. 

Here’s what we know.

The community action decision 

The Wisconsin Department of Children and Families decided in May to remove the SDC’s community action agency status, effective July 3.

Although the department believes SDC has not been operating anti-poverty services since it shut down in April 2024, despite reopening in December, SDC’s leaders have said the state did not follow the proper process to make this decision.

Without this designation, SDC will not be eligible for a Community Services Block Grant, which is a small portion of its budget but significant to its efforts to pay back employees and rebuild its service programs.

How does a federal review work? 

When a state decides to rescind community action status or the related block grant funding from a local agency, the agency can request a review from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services within 30 days. 

SDC submitted a request for a review of the state’s community action decision to the department on June 9, citing concerns about due process. 

The Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, will evaluate if the state’s determination process followed the guidance on the termination or reduction of funding for entities eligible for the Community Services Block Grant, according to a spokesperson from the department. 

The Division of Community Assistance, which is part of the Office of Community Services within the federal department, oversees block grant funding for community action agencies. 

“I think that HHS is concerned about the process that was used to de-designate SDC, and so my expectation is that they will be talking to the state about the process,” said William Sulton, SDC’s attorney.

The Department of Children and Families received notification on June 11 from the Office of Community Services that SDC requested a review, but did not receive the request itself, according to Gina Paige, communications director for the department.

The review will be completed within 90 days of receiving all required documentation from the state, according to federal law. If not completed in the 90-day time frame, the state’s decision will be upheld. 

As part of the request, SDC is asking the Department of Health and Human Services for direct financial assistance. 

According to the CSBG Act, if a state violates the de-designation process –  by terminating or reducing funding of an eligible entity before the state hearing and the secretary’s review – the Health and Human Services secretary is authorized to provide financial assistance to the entity affected until the violation is corrected.

SDC’s concerns 

SDC raised two main concerns with the state’s determination process in the request, based on state and federal laws.  

The first concern is that the public hearing on SDC’s community action status, held by the Department of Children and Families on April 4, did not meet the legal requirements of a “hearing on the record.”

“You’re supposed to be permitted to call witnesses and present evidence,” Sulton said. “… We were given seven minutes to make a speech, and that was it.” 

SDC also says that both the Department of Children and Families’ secretary and the legislative bodies of the city of Milwaukee and Milwaukee County would have to sign off on the decision, based on a state statute that requires the legislative body that initially granted the agency community action status to approve rescinding it. 

“They didn’t go out and get position statements from the city and the county’s legislative bodies,” Sulton said. 

The department did not comment on these claims. (Paige previously said it has worked closely with the Office of Community Services and Milwaukee County to determine the process needed to move forward with de-designating SDC.)

Although Milwaukee County’s Office of Corporation Counsel submitted a letter to say it found no records of the Board of Supervisors taking action on SDC’s status as a community action agency, Sulton said that doesn’t mean there are no records. 

He argues that this provision of the law, added in 1983, was put in place to protect SDC from arbitrary state action.

Funding deadline

In May, three state lawmakers asked SDC to consider voluntarily de-designating, which would allow the state and Milwaukee County to more quickly find an interim service provider to use SDC’s allocated funds in Milwaukee County. 

The $1.18 million in 2024 block grant funding could be recouped by the federal government if not spent by Sept. 30, 2025, according to the Department of Children and Families. 

However, Sulton said when he reached out to the Department of Health and Human Services before filing the review, an employee told him the 2024 funds had to be obligated by 2026.

“To the extent that anybody has the impression that this money has to be obligated by September or it’ll be lost, HHS says it’s not the case,” he said. 

States and subrecipients usually have two years to distribute funds, but it depends on state-specific policies, according to HHS.

The state’s Sept. 30 deadline marks two years after the beginning of the 2024 fiscal year in October 2023, according to Paige. 

Though Paige said that SDC’s request for review is perpetuating the lack of services in Milwaukee County, she added that the department plans to seek a six-month liquidation extension from the federal government.

“It’s quite possible that we’re gonna be on a really tight timeline to get that money out the door, so that’s why we’re hoping that we can work with the federal government and see if they can allow us an extension to expend it a little bit longer,” Paige said. 

Board member changes

The SDC board added two commissioners in May – Milwaukee Public Schools appointed Michael Harris, and the Interfaith Conference of Greater Milwaukee appointed Peter Fetzer, an attorney at Foley & Lardner LLP. 

In the last seven months, the SDC board has expanded from three to 10 commissioners, thanks to several appointments to vacant seats. The board is designed to have 18 members at full capacity. 

Commissioner Lucero Ayala’s term has ended, according to Sulton. Ayala was nominated and selected last year to fill the remainder of Serina Chavez’s term as an elected commissioner.

Milwaukee Social Development Commission wants feds to reverse state funding decision   is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.