RI Top Doctor Discusses Impact of Trump Cuts to NIH Grants
RI Top Doctor Discusses Impact of Trump Cuts to NIH Grants
He discusses the impact on Rhode Island and the latest federal court decision.
“The NIH stands for the National Institutes of Health and is the main institution at the federal level that funds science and clinical research here in the U.S. It's really one of the crown jewels of science and innovation. It's the leading organization that funds biomedical research throughout the world, and I've been a lucky recipient to have several grants from the NIH over time, including a couple that were recently terminated,” said Dr. Chan.
In April, GoLocal unveiled how the Trump administration's cuts canceled millions in funding for the University of Rhode Island, Rhode Island Hospital, and Brown University.
Dr. Chan said those managing the research received letters a couple of months ago announcing the termination.
He said that the termination of an approved grant is highly unusual.
“We all got letters about that [cancelation due to gender and DEI issues] and those were some of the exact wording, saying that one of [the grants] was canceled because of the focus on gender or the inclusion of gender wasn't even focused on gender, it just included gender diverse individuals and that these grants no longer 'effectuated' the NIH priorities at this time,” said Dr. Chan.
“This administration's cancelation of grants was really something that had never happened before and really frankly surprised a lot of us,” added Dr. Chan.
Legal Turn - Court Blocks Trump
Now, the legal battle over the funding has taken a substantial turn.
A federal judge ruled last Monday that the Trump administration’s termination of hundreds of grants by the National Institutes of Health was “void and illegal,” ordering some of them to be reinstated.
In Monday’s ruling, Federal District Judge William G. Young found that the directives that led to the grant terminations were “arbitrary and capricious” and said they had “no force and effect.” The judge’s ruling ordered the funding of the grants to be restored.
On Thursday, an email was issued by the groups who brought the lawsuits stating that grants, which had been terminated, were reinstated. GoLocal secured a copy of the email, which read in part:
On Monday, June 16, we had a hearing on “Phase 1” of our trial before Judge Young in the District of Massachusetts. Phase 1 focuses on the illegality of NIH’s Directives to terminate grants for health disparities research or other disfavored topics and diversity-oriented pipeline grants, as well as the resulting grant terminations and non-renewals.
Our hearing was combined with that of 16 states that filed a related case about the same issues impacting their state institutions. While the hearing also addressed some aspects of claims pertaining to applicants for completely new awards, the court has not yet ruled on those claims and additional evidence and arguments will be presented pertaining to those claims at a later time.
Of relevance, on Monday the judge issued the following rulings:
1. The Directives are bereft of reasoning entirely, are conclusory, and do not recognize the reliance interests of the many parties affected by them. Consequently, the Directives are “arbitrary and capricious” (a legal term of art under the Administrative Procedures Act). This means they are void, have no force or effect, and are illegal. They are therefore vacated and set aside.
2. Consequently, each of the grant terminations shared with the court are vacated and set aside.
Lawyers for the NIH grant recipients state they expect the Trump Administration to seek a stay to block Judge Young’s decision and to seek an appeal.
SEE THE LIST OF THE NIH GRANTS CUT BY THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION - IT IS NOT KNOWN WHICH OF THESE WILL BE REINSTATED AS A RESULT OF JUDGE YOUNG'S DECISION