Judge slams White House over NIH grant cuts, orders funding restored

(CN) — The Trump administration’s cancellation of hundreds of public health grants for the National Institutes of Health is illegal and discriminatory, a federal judge ruled Monday.

Earlier this year, the administration decided to broadly terminate funding for grants that it perceived as relating to diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

But according to suing states and health organizations, that money was already allocated for critical research into infectious diseases.

U.S. District Judge William Young said that the administration “never defined” what DEI actually means when deciding to cancel the grants, and ultimately found that the funding cuts would harm marginalized communities.

Following a hearing on Monday morning, the Ronald Reagan appointee ruled from the bench that the grants be restored, noting that he had “never seen a record where racial discrimination was so palpable.”

Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, one of 16 Democratic attorneys general suing the administration over the cuts, celebrated Young’s ruling as a “rebuke of the discriminatory actions carried out by this administration.”

“Since taking office, Donald Trump has worked overtime to attack our nation’s health care system, including illegally eliminating critical research grants that prioritize the health of women, our LGBTQ+ community, and communities of color,” Campbell said in a statement.

“We won’t let this administration play politics with our public health or violate the law,” Campbell added. “I look forward to seeing these federal funds restored to life-saving and critical health care and research.”

Young’s ruling came in a case brought by states and health groups that say that the Trump administration unlawfully cut funding with vague notices that targeted DEI, transgender issues and vaccine hesitancy. He issued an order from the bench after intensely scrutinizing government lawyers over cancellation letters to grant recipients, which claimed DEI studies “support unlawful discrimination.”

“Where’s the support for that?” Young asked, begging the government for “any support, any rational explanation.”

“Just saying it is not sufficient,” the judge continued.

The plaintiffs argue the funding cuts will hinder research into critical treatments for diseases like HIV, AIDS, COVID-19, Zika, Alzheimer’s and shingles. Young questioned the government’s claim that the targeted programs were discriminatory

“Point me to anywhere in the record where any particular grant or group of grants is being used to support unlawful discrimination on the basis of race,” the judge said. “From what I can see, it’s the reverse. But point it out to me.”

Justice Department attorney Thomas Ports Jr., who is representing the defendants in this case, said there was “nothing that I can point the court to” to bolster the claim.

“DEI is never defined” in the letters, Young noted. And while the Trump administration might take the “valid government position” to scrutinize affirmative action programs, “that’s not a license to discriminate,” the judge said.

Young expressed similar doubts in earlier hearings, telling the government he wasn’t persuaded that research on gender identity or racial health disparities is unscientific or harmful.

Perhaps foreshadowing a ruling in the states’ favor, Young preemptively asked the government defendants on Monday if they would comply with an order to reinstate the canceled grants.

“Yes, your honor. I would expect defendants to comply,” Ports said.

Young combined two related lawsuits — one from 16 Democratic states and another from health organizations like the American Public Health Association — for Monday’s hearing.

The complaints target several defendants, including Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and NIH subagencies such as the National Cancer Institute and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The states argue that Congress had already approved the grants and that the administration’s abrupt reversal has derailed key research efforts.

“Defendants’ destructive efforts have taken the form of across-the-board delays in the review and approval of otherwise-fundable grant applications and widespread terminations of already-issued grants,” the states argue. “Plaintiffs challenge both.”

The multistate coalition is comprised of the Democratic attorneys general from Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington and Wisconsin.

It’s one of several ongoing challenges to the Trump administration’s widespread cuts to public health funding, part of the president’s broader goal to drastically reduce the size of the federal government.

In March, another federal judge in Massachusetts ordered the administration to reverse a roughly $4 billion cut to the NIH, which would have impacted staffing and equipment in biomedical research labs around the country. That ruling was prompted by a lawsuit from 22 states and several universities, hospitals and research institutions.

Follow @Uebey Follow @uebey.bsky.social