Even the conservative judges disagree on which court this should be heard in, just that it can't be ruled on now. It's amazing how easily it is to wipe out the redress of the Court system.
What is not fine is having a censorship committee, that has obviously no idea about the field, to be deciding based on their vibes whether a proposal should be funded.
I find it insane that in 2025, in the USA, Medical researchers have to scrub their science manuscripts for potentially offending keywords.
I realize that people are scrubbing certain words from their grants, but how real is the danger that the NIH won't be smart enough to tell the difference?
Second, the programs you’re referring to (“diversity” meaning only people with the right skin color etc.) used a very clear and well-defined model of “under-represented minority” that (in addition to members of this or that minority racial or ethnic group) included women, people from rural zip codes, people who were the first in their families to go to college, people who grew up on free/reduced lunch, and a bunch of other categories that have long been known to be under-represented in science. This definition has been around for decades and there’s been a ton of research about the importance and efficacy of these kinds of programs, some of which are training programs to try and diversify the incoming pipeline of scientists, and some of which were additional funding pools to try and address the very, very, very well-documented gap in early career funding awarded to URM scientists. Characterizing it as just being about skin color is simply inaccurate.
Some of the other “DEI” research that has been terminated consists of projects looking at health issues that are specific to certain populations; the NIH has officially said that health disparities research is still allowed but we are all scratching our heads trying to figure out how to write grants for it that don’t run afoul of the current “rules” which are frankly nonsensical and very “vibe” based so it’s hard to know what will and what won’t be allowed. Almost like they don’t want us to bother trying…
You are of course correct that it’s utterly bananas that in 225 we are wasting our time trying to guess which words shouldn’t be used in grant applications, and that our colleagues at the CDC and NIH are having to do the same for their papers.
amir734jj•6h ago
slipperydippery•5h ago
jmclnx•52m ago
This seems to me a repeat of 1930s Germany, where many scientists left Nazi Germany for the US. That turned the US into an R&D powerhouse. By then, no one will care what the US does, it will be totally ignored.