NIH Agrees to Evaluate Stalled Scientific Grants

"The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) has agreed to review hundreds of medical science grant applications after they were paused under new Trump administration diversity-related restrictions. The terms of the agreement, which comes amid an ongoing legal fight over science funding, will see the NIH assess each grant on scientific merit and ignore the antidiversity orders. The stalled study applications covered by the lawsuit, which was brought against the NIH by science organizations including the American Public Health Association and individual scientists,"

"Previously, a federal judge in June ruled that hundreds of NIH grant terminations were void and illegal because they violated discrimination laws, but the status of stalled grant applications was left to a separate future decision. Internal NIH directives issued by the Trump administration in February and in May had effectively barred funding research on diversity objectives, gender identity or COVID."

"And while the Supreme Court in August ruled the judge lacked jurisdiction in the case, it declined to stay the finding that the NIH's directives were unreasonable and unlawful. The dispute over terminated grants has since been sent to a federal appeals court in Boston, which will continue the proceedings in early January. In the meantime, the NIH's new agreement"

The NIH agreed to reassess hundreds of medical grant applications that had been paused under Trump-era directives targeting diversity-related research. Each application will be evaluated on scientific merit, and the NIH will not follow the antidiversity orders. The paused proposals span Alzheimer’s, brain aging, HIV, minority health and sexual violence and were challenged in a lawsuit by scientific organizations and individual researchers. A federal judge previously ruled that many grant terminations violated discrimination laws. Trump administration directives had effectively barred funding for diversity objectives, gender identity and COVID-related research. The legal dispute continues in the federal appeals court.

Read at www.scientificamerican.com