Honestly, I feel they should have gone ahead and published the weekly mortality and morbidity report anyway. When inevitably criticized, they could have pointed

Honestly, I feel they should have gone ahead and published the weekly mortality and morbidity report anyway. When inevitably criticized, they could have pointed out that it's essential public health info and specifically reports on emerging health risks (which is why it hasn't missed an issue in 60 years). Would this have led to a bunch of people being fired? I would guess yes. But preemptively going along with the diktat practically means that when some sort of continuity resumes, the general public will assume the problem is solved and forget about it, even if the new status quo is objectively worse. The general public has only limited cognitive capacity and one reason Trump has been such a successful politician is that he gives large numbers of people the simplicity and epistemic closure that they crave.