The Trump administration sets key steps in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) process for funding medical research that is likely to violate a temporary restraining order on the freeze on federal funding by federal judges. I’ve blocked it.
The NIH has stopped submitting meetings where scientists review NIH grant proposals after the Trump administration suspends health agency communications. By law, the study section must appear on the register 15 days before the meeting.
“The idea is that the public has the right to know who is giving advice to the federal government and when they meet,” said Jeremy Berg, a biochemist who previously oversaw NIH funding. I said that.
These conferences are essential in the funding process for scientists from national institutions studying almost every component of disease and medicine, including drug development, cancer, heart disease, and aging.
An internal NIH email obtained by the Guardian confirmed that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had directed the NIH to retain federal register submissions indefinitely.
“They effectively close the wall research program,” said Carol Lavonne, a northwestern university biologist who runs the Stem Cell Institute and participates in the research section.
This is a clear violation of the federal judge’s order, according to Samuel Bagenstos, a law professor at the University of Michigan, who served as HHS general counsel until December 2024.
Judge John McConnell “initially issued a temporary restraining order to halt the suspension of funds,” Babenstos said. All of that, the Trump administration must immediately suspend federal funds. Second, this is an important language, such as managing implementation, operating, or clearing technical hurdles. ”
So, “We’re going to spend money, but we’re going to spend it only after the research section has been there. Bagunstos added that he’s clearly ignored the language.
If the Trump administration continues to circumvent court orders, Bayberstos says judges have plenty of tools at will. They may issue more specific orders directed at the person responsible for the violation, include prison time, or even hold them in court civil contagion that cannot be revoked by the president’s pardon. can.
In the research section, scientists from institutions across the country are coming together to contact them to peer review the grant proposals, Berg said. In each section, over 20 peer reviewers will come together to see up to 100 proposals.
“It’s basically about two weeks of work,” says Berg.
Sources familiar with the process estimated that $1 billion in NIH funds were pending for each 3-day delayed study section. The research section must appear in the federal register 15 days prior, but the meeting scheduled to begin on February 20th has been postponed to the previous day.
“I was checking in on a flight in DC this week without warning, so my research section was cancelled for no reason,” the scientist who was supposed to review her grant proposals. I said that. With the cancellation, scientists and her colleagues collectively summarise the issue related to the federal register. This is a relatively obscure step along the way.
This is because two scientists are scheduled to attend the February 20th research section, and reviewers said they had never heard of the requirement until this week. Those who suspect that piloting is “another clever way to do war with medicine,” because even those working at NIH have very few people who fully understand how it works. is. It “is probably something that someone like me would never have to interact with or heard of,” he said.
None of the scientists the Guardian spoke to were told about why the research section was not cancelled until the very end, despite never doing so, although none of them had been given an explanation. Labonne suspects it is because NIH staff still want the meeting to move forward in some way.
“They are trying to make it possible until the very end, hoping that someone has mercy, allows them to continue the research section and abandon the requirement for perhaps 15 days.” Rabonne explained.
Stuart Buck, a Harvard graduate and executive director of Good Science Project, said that these moves will “read tea leaves are extremely difficult” to read about what will happen next.
Jay Bhatacharya, whom Trump nominated to direct the NIH, said “we haven’t even had a confirmation hearing yet.” “Why are you running out a rather dramatic policy without the involvement of people who are supposed to become experts running the agency?”
Buck continued: “All public rhetoric is to reduce deficits or reduce regulations. But what they’re doing so far is not aiming for deficits or regulation. They say. We have cancelled minor contracts compared to the deficit.
Scientists who were to attend the postponed research section as reviewers also had difficulty understanding these behaviors. If the meeting is rescheduled, the reviewer must either forget the details of the reviewed suggestions or spend extra time reviewing the review again.
“All of this doesn’t mean much to me. They don’t even save money by doing this, and in the end what they’re doing is slowing everything down and ruining people’s lives. It costs more money than anything else to do,” he said.
Another reviewer said that time waste is “annoying”, but “the real disturbing thing here is that there is really a lot of really great science on those grants, and really depends on them. That means they need to be funded and otherwise the lab will be closed.”
NIH Press Office did not respond to requests for comment in time to be included in the story.
This article was revised on February 23, 2025 to clarify that Jeremy Berg’s position is a biochemist and not a genetic scientist, as mentioned previously.
