Trump Administration’s Funding Freeze Sparks Legal Battles and Concerns for Science and Innovation
In the initial week of the Trump administration, the White House instituted a temporary halt on billions in congressionally approved funds, causing disruptions across essential sectors such as education, healthcare, and scientific research. This decision led several states and federal grantees to file lawsuits, challenging the scope of executive power.
Federal courts have intervened to temporarily block the funding freeze, labeling it unlawful, as presidential powers do not extend to arbitrarily stopping funds that Congress has sanctioned. While some funds have been restored, the uncertainty remains for those dependent on these resources, particularly in the fields of science, technology, and innovation.
This directive is emblematic of broader strategies by the administration to destabilize scientific research support. Since entering office, the administration has sought to cancel over 7,000 grants from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation — the primary funding bodies for biomedical and science and engineering research. These grants, totaling over $3 billion, are being tracked by Grant Witness. Further plans include proposed cuts of up to $44 billion in research and development funding for the forthcoming fiscal year, as detailed in a comprehensive report by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).
Arati Prabhakar’s Involvement and Perspective
Arati Prabhakar, recently a chief science and technology advisor in President Biden’s cabinet, has filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the legal challenge, New York v. Trump. With a PhD in applied physics and leadership roles at DARPA and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, Prabhakar articulates the tangible impacts of the funding halt and emphasizes that stable federal funding is fundamental to the U.S.’s scientific leadership and the nation’s overall well-being.
As the First Circuit Court of Appeals prepares to address the case on November 18, Prabhakar shared insights regarding the implications of the funding stoppage and the broader assault on federal research. “I’ve spent my whole career contributing to different aspects of science, technology, and innovation both inside government and in Silicon Valley. The last thing I ever expected is that I would be submitting an amicus brief, but we’re in a crisis. What’s at stake is not just the immediate harms from the funding freeze. When we stop federal investments in research and development, we’re forfeiting our future,” she explained.
Impacts of Proposed Cuts and Broader Efforts
Prabhakar expressed deep concern about the administration’s broader efforts to cut billions from scientific funding, stating, “Clinical trials for cancer patients were stopped. Defunded satellite missions and climate centers mean less of the data farmers need to manage water and crop yields. Deadly foodborne illnesses will go undetected by under-resourced local health departments.” She highlighted the necessity of consistent investment in science, citing the historical success of GPS technology as a product of collaborative research and development.
Private Sector vs. Federal Funding
Regarding the potential role of the private sector in filling funding gaps, Prabhakar was clear: “Flat-out no. The private sector funds research and development for products and services that lead to profits and growth, and that’s what it should do. The foundation of basic research is not profitable for an individual company, but it is vital for industries and the economy. And companies don’t do research for public purposes, like understanding environmental harms. That is where the federal government comes in.”
The Need for Federal Research Support
Despite acknowledging that federally funded research and development is imperfect, Prabhakar insists on its indispensability. “Federally funded research and development is not perfect, but it’s indispensable. That’s why I’m fighting for it. Every minute that I was in public service, my work was about aiming this enormous capability our country has built at the greatest opportunities and challenges of the future,” she stated, urging for actions to combat the current crisis and to recommit to enhancing the system.
