NIH Agrees to Evaluate Stalled Scientific Grants

NIH agrees to evaluate blocked science grants

By Dan Vergano edited by Claire Cameron

The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) has agreed to review hundreds of medical science grant applications after they were put on hold due to the Trump administration’s new diversity restrictions. The terms of the agreement, which comes amid an ongoing legal battle over science funding, will see the NIH evaluate each grant based on its scientific merit and ignore anti-diversity orders.

The blocked study requests covered by the lawsuit, brought against the NIH by scientific organizations including the American Public Health Association and individual scientists, cover topics ranging from Alzheimer’s disease research to HIV to minority health to sexual violence.

“I look forward to my funding proposal being fairly evaluated,” plaintiff Nikki Maphis of the University of New Mexico, who studies brain aging and the effects of Alzheimer’s disease and alcohol consumption, said in a statement.

On supporting science journalism

If you enjoy this article, please consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscription. By purchasing a subscription, you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Previously, a federal judge ruled in June that hundreds of NIH grant terminations were “void” and “unlawful” because they violated discrimination laws, but the status of the blocked grant applications was left for a separate later decision. Internal NIH guidance issued by the Trump administration in February and May had effectively prohibited funding for research on diversity goals, gender identity, or COVID. And although the Supreme Court ruled in August that the judge lacked jurisdiction in the case, it refused to stay the finding that the NIH guidelines were unreasonable and illegal. The dispute over ending the subsidies has since been sent to a federal appeals court in Boston, which will continue proceedings in early January. Meanwhile, the new NIH agreement reopens blocked grant applications for review while the case moves forward, thereby resolving this aspect of the dispute.*

“Defendants will complete review of the applications under the NIH scientific review process, without applying the challenged guidelines,” the agreement states. A judge will oversee their good faith request.

The NIH did not admit any wrongdoing or commit to funding the studies as part of the agreement; he will simply examine them. The NIH declined to comment on the blocked applications in a statement to Scientific Americanstating, “The agency remains committed to supporting rigorous, evidence-based research that advances the health of all Americans. »

Yet even though the agreement does not guarantee that the studies will receive grants, science advocates have been applauded by the progress it represents.

“This agreement represents important progress for researchers affected by illegal government intervention in the standard grant review process,” says Colette Delawalla of the science advocacy group Stand Up for Science. “I am particularly relieved for early-career scientists who have been disproportionately affected.”

*Editor’s Note (12/30/25): This paragraph was updated after publication to correct the timing of the federal decision and to clarify the content and timing of the NIH guidance.

It’s time to defend science

If you enjoyed this article, I would like to ask for your support. Scientific American has been defending science and industry for 180 years, and we are currently experiencing perhaps the most critical moment in these two centuries of history.

I was a Scientific American subscriber since the age of 12, and it helped shape the way I see the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of respect for our vast and magnificent universe. I hope this is the case for you too.

If you subscribe to Scientific Americanyou help ensure our coverage centers on meaningful research and discoveries; that we have the resources to account for decisions that threaten laboratories across the United States; and that we support budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In exchange, you receive essential information, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, newsletters not to be missed, unmissable videos, stimulating games and the best writings and reports from the scientific world. You can even offer a subscription to someone.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you will support us in this mission.