In a remarkable turn of events, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., long a vocal critic of lax federal oversight on radiofrequency (RF) radiation from wireless devices, now holds the keys to reforming the very system he once challenged in court. Sworn in as the 26th Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on February 13, 2025, Kennedy inherits not just a cabinet position but a statutory mandate under Public Law 90-602 to address decades of scientific warnings about non-thermal RF risks—warnings that federal agencies have largely ignored.
This convergence of advocacy and authority comes at a critical juncture: a 2021 federal court ruling demands a fresh review of outdated safety guidelines, while the recent halt of key government research underscores ongoing violations of federal law.
The Statutory Foundation: Public Law 90-602’s Unfulfilled Mandate
Enacted in 1968 as the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act, Public Law 90-602 amended the Public Health Service Act to empower the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare—now HHS—to safeguard public health from radiation-emitting electronic products, including those using RF energy like cell phones and wireless networks.
The law’s plain text is unequivocal: The Secretary “shall” plan, conduct, coordinate, and support research into the health effects of such radiation; publish findings; and promulgate performance standards “when necessary to protect the public health and safety.”
This authority extends directly to RF-emitting consumer products, as the Act covers “electronic product radiation” broadly, encompassing non-ionizing RF fields from devices like televisions, microwaves, and modern wireless tech.
Yet for over half a century, successive HHS Secretaries have failed to fully exercise this power, deferring instead to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), whose thermal-only guidelines dismiss well-documented non-thermal biological effects.
Now, as HHS Secretary, Kennedy is the official legally commanded to rectify this—including restarting stalled research and updating standards based on evolving scientific consensus.
The 1996 FCC Guidelines: A Legacy of Corporate Capture and Ignored Science
The FCC’s 1996 radiofrequency exposure limits, still in effect today, represent a pivotal failure of regulatory integrity. Adopted amid the Telecommunications Act of 1996, these guidelines focus exclusively on thermal (heating) effects, capping Specific Absorption Rates (SAR) at levels that prevent tissue burns—but ignoring subtler non-thermal interactions such as DNA damage, oxidative stress, and neurological disruption.
Evidence of these risks predates 1996 by decades, yet was sidelined through what critics call corporate capture. For instance:
-
The CTIA, under Tom Wheeler, funded a $25 million program led by Dr. George Carlo, which uncovered links between cell phone radiation and brain tumors. Carlo was fired in 1999 after urging stronger safeguards.
-
U.S. Navy-funded research by Dr. Arthur Guy in 1971 demonstrated non-thermal behavioral changes in animals at low-level RF exposures.
-
Allan Frey’s pioneering 1960s work revealed the microwave auditory effect—pulsed RF inducing perceived sounds without heating.
-
Dr. Henry Lai’s 1995 study showed single-strand DNA breaks in rat brain cells at non-thermal exposures. Later meta-analyses confirmed ~72% of independent studies reported biological effects.
-
Soviet-era research dating back to the 1920s documented cardiovascular, neurological, sleep, and reproductive harms from chronic low-level RF exposure.
Despite this evidence, the FCC rushed through the guidelines, prioritizing industry expansion over public health.
Adding to the problem is Section 704 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which preempts state and local governments from regulating wireless facilities based on health grounds. Critics argue this federal overreach violates both the Tenth Amendment and the First Amendment, stripping communities and parents of their right to protect children from unproven 5G deployments.
The 2021 Court Victory: A Mandate for Change
Kennedy’s advocacy crystallized in the landmark case Environmental Health Trust v. FCC (2021). Children’s Health Defense (CHD)—which he chairs—and Environmental Health Trust petitioned the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The unanimous ruling found the FCC’s 2019 reaffirmation of its 1996 guidelines to be “arbitrary and capricious,” citing the agency’s failure to address evidence of harms beyond cancer, such as:
-
Fertility decline
-
Electromagnetic hypersensitivity
-
5G-specific risks
The court remanded the matter, ordering the FCC to act—yet four years later, no changes have been made.
As a private citizen, Kennedy exposed regulatory capture. Now, as HHS Secretary, he carries the statutory duty under PL 90-602 to integrate science into standards for radiation-emitting products—directly overlapping with FCC jurisdiction. With the FCC paralyzed, HHS is positioned, and obligated, to lead.
The NTP Halt: A Fresh Violation of Federal Law
Urgency is compounded by the National Toxicology Program (NTP), an HHS interagency project, halting RF radiation research in January 2024. This effectively shuttered the government’s flagship program on wireless health impacts—despite PL 90-602’s mandate for continuous study.
The NTP’s prior work included a 2018 report linking cell phone radiation to “clear evidence” of heart tumors in male rats. Its termination amid industry pressure violates the Act’s requirement for impartial, ongoing inquiry.
As of September 2025, the NTP program has been dormant for over 18 months, leaving HHS in non-compliance. Restarting this research now falls directly on Secretary Kennedy.
A Call to Accountability: Kennedy’s Opportunity and Obligation
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s journey from courtroom challenger to HHS Secretary is no coincidence—it’s a clarion call for reform. He sued the FCC and won. Now, the law gives him both the power and obligation to act.
To fulfill Public Law 90-602, Kennedy must:
-
Reinstate and expand NTP research.
-
Convene expert panels under HHS authority.
-
Promulgate biologically based RF safety standards.
The 1996 thermal-only paradigm—born of corporate influence and reinforced by unconstitutional preemption—cannot stand against the weight of evidence from Frey, Guy, Lai, Carlo, and decades of global research.
The public must demand action. In Kennedy’s hands lies not just compliance with the law, but the chance to restore trust in public institutions that, for too long, have prioritized wireless proliferation over human health.
The clock is ticking—will he deliver?
⚖️ Sources: Case law, Public Law 90-602, FCC regulatory history, NTP reports, U.S. Navy research, Soviet-era RF health studies, Lai (1995), Carlo (1999), and Environmental Health Trust v. FCC (2021).