Key Metrics
14.34
Heat Index-
Impact LevelMedium
-
Scope LevelNational
-
Last Update2025-08-21
Key Impacts
Negative Impacts (7)
Event Overview
Federal funding decisions are increasingly subject to judicial intervention, highlighting tensions between executive authority and institutional mandates. The use of litigation to challenge administrative guidance suggests escalating scrutiny over policy changes affecting research and public services. This scenario exemplifies the balancing act among governmental branches and underscores the ongoing debate about discretionary power in allocating significant national resources.
Collect Records
Supreme Court Allows Trump Administration to Halt $783 Million in NIH Grants Pending Litigation
The Supreme Court has allowed the Trump administration to temporarily block $783 million in National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants while ongoing litigation continues. The court declined to force President Donald Trump to spend the grant money for now, but did not block a lower court ruling that had tossed the administration’s guidance at the heart of the funding cuts. The case centers on executive orders signed by President Trump at the start of his second term requiring agencies to terminate grants or contracts that promote gender ideology or preferences under diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts.
Officials at the NIH subsequently terminated more than 1,700 grants they said dealt with those issues. Sixteen Democratic-led states, public health advocacy groups, and some affected scientists challenged the cancellations. Lower courts initially sided with the challengers, temporarily requiring the administration to resume funding while the case was litigated. The Supreme Court decision, which split 5-4, denied immediate relief to the grant recipients but indicated they could seek the money in a different court, specifically the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in Washington, D.C.
Chief Justice John Roberts joined the three liberal justices to deny the Trump administration’s efforts entirely, while Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh favored siding with the administration. Justice Amy Coney Barrett sided with the administration in stopping the grant funds for now, but also suggested the recipients are likely to prevail if they bring their claims to the proper court. The ruling leaves the grant recipients without federal funds for the time being, allowing the Trump administration to claim a victory in emergency appeals to the Supreme Court.