Judge strikes down some Trump research cuts linked to diversity, gender

Washington — A federal judge struck down sweeping Trump administration orders that resulted in the cancellation of hundreds of National Institutes of Health research grants because they were linked to topics like diversity, gender identity and vaccine hesitancy.

"The ideologically motivated directives to terminate grants alleged to constitute DEI, 'gender ideology,' or other forbidden topics were, in fact, arbitrary and capricious, and have now been ruled unlawful," Dr. Peter Lurie, head of the Center for Science in the Public Interest said in a statement Tuesday. Lurie's group was among those that filed the lawsuit.

Judge William Young of the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts capped a trial Monday for multiple lawsuits that were filed against the Trump administration: one by a coalition of public health groups and another by several Democratic state attorneys general.

It is possible that the Trump administration could seek to block the ruling by Young, who was nominated to the court by President Reagan in 1985.

"HHS is exploring all legal options, including filing an appeal and moving to stay the order," Andrew Nixon, communications director for the Department of Health and Human Services, said in a statement.

Nixon said the department "stands by its decision to end funding for research that prioritized ideological agendas over scientific rigor and meaningful outcomes for the American people," saying the department wanted taxpayer dollars to support "gold standard science" and not "divisive DEI mandates or gender ideology."

The court has not yet published Young's order in the case, but notes from the clerk announced that the challenged directives have been vacated and that the Trump administration was ordered to "promptly comply."

Separate court cases are underway for other cuts to medical research funding sought by the Trump administration, like the terminations of funding to universities like Harvard and Columbia that have disrupted studies for cancer and diseases.

Another federal judge in Massachusetts earlier this year blocked the NIH from implementing a policy change that would have cut funding for research overhead costs, which is now being appealed by the Trump administration.

"Today's court ruling halted the cancellation of millions of dollars that have already been awarded to address important public health needs and will allow funding for life-saving medical research to continue," the Massachusetts attorney general's office said Monday in a statement.

They said that the judge had "denounced these actions" at the trial, saying he had "never seen a record where racial discrimination was so palpable" and would "be blind not to call it out."

Young's ruling came after opponents challenged the process used by the Trump administration to come up with and implement its steep cuts to grants, saying the law requires federal agencies changing their policies to "supply a reasoned analysis for the change."

Flaws cited by a trial brief brought by the groups included the lack of a definition for what qualified as banned "DEI studies" and NIH Acting Director Dr. Matthew Memoli having spent only minutes deciding which grants and funding opportunities to cut.

"Defendants do not explain how lightning speed implementation of the Directives could possibly reflect reasoned decisionmaking," they wrote.