The Trump administration’s cancellation of National Institutes of Health grants for research projects on diverse populations amounts to racial discrimination and anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination, a federal judge ruled Monday.
The terminations are illegal and void and the grants must be reinstated immediately, Judge William Young of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled.
“I‘ve sat on this bench now for 40 years. I’ve never seen government racial discrimination like this,” Young, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, said during oral arguments Monday, The Boston Globe reports. “Is it true of our society as a whole? Have we fallen so low? Have we no shame?”
The administration terminated the grants, which amount to billions of dollars, most because of their ties to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, which Donald Trump opposes. Early in his second term, he issued an executive order ending all DEI work in the federal government. Grants focusing on gender identity were canceled as well.
Public health activists and labor unions filed suit in April to challenge the cancellations, saying they represent an “ongoing ideological purge” by the administration. Those suing included researchers, the American Public Health Association, Ibis Reproductive Health and International Union, United Automobile, and the Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America. They are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, its Massachusetts affiliate, Protect Democracy, and the Center for Science in the Public Interest.
The total revoked amounted to $2.4 billion in pending grants, of which $1.3 billion had already been spent on the projects that were canceled, and that would be wasted if the cuts stood, according to the lawsuit.
“The decision, which can be appealed, hands a temporary victory to researchers across the country, who are reeling from unprecedented changes at the world’s largest public funder of biomedical research,” STAT reports.
Thomas Ports, an attorney for the Trump administration, had argued that some of the grants were for projects that are not “scientifically valuable” and that DEI-related work often supported “unlawful discrimination,” according to Axios.
“Where’s the support for that? Any support? Any rational explanation?” Young replied, as reported by the Globe. “I see no evidence of that. Point me to … any particular grant or group of grants being used to support unlawful discrimination on the basis of race. From what I can see, it’s the reverse.”
“Today’s decision is a crucial step in protecting public health and safeguarding critical research that helps us understand, prevent, and treat life-threatening diseases,” plaintiff Dr. Brittany Charlton, associate professor at Harvard Chan School of Public Health, said in an ACLU of Massachusetts press release. “Scientific research must be guided by evidence, not political agendas, and this ruling rightly restores important research projects that should never have been disrupted.”
“Today’s ruling confirms that science must be guided by evidence, not ideology. By blocking NIH’s unlawful directive, the court has protected the integrity of scientific research and ensured that critical studies, especially those focused on underserved and marginalized communities, can continue without political interference,” added Olga Akselrod, senior counsel in the Racial Justice Program at the ACLU. “This decision safeguards not only the researchers affected, but also the millions of people who stand to benefit from their work.”
Read the full article here
