I can't take any of this seriously so long as any research on race and intelligence continues to be banned as heresy rather than being discussed scientifically.

It seems weird for the government to collect data useful for research, but then to gate access based on the viewpoints of potential users. This restriction doesn't support the search for truth.

Whatever people think of Lasker (Cremieux) and his views, isn't data being available to all interested parties the best way to find the truth?

The article mentions this towards the very end:

  Adam Candeub, the top lawyer at the Federal Communications Commission, wrote a law review article in 2024 criticizing the N.I.H.’s discouragement of stigmatizing research. He compared it to the persecution of Galileo.
  “A liberal society should support the search for truth,” Mr. Candeub wrote, “regardless of how uncomfortable and unsettling that truth turns out to be.”

If you think about it for just a moment, it would actually be extraordinary for the races to have diverged in so many easily observable and visible ways, yet somehow miraculously demonstrate absolutely no aggregate differences in any measurable way in any psychological, social, or intellectual attributes. It's so absurdly unlikely that it ought to require a mountain of evidence (and one hell of a theory explaining it) to not be laughed out of the conversation.