MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST:
A federal judge in Boston has ruled that the National Institutes of Health acted illegally in terminating some 800 research grants. The grants focused on topics related to diversity, transgender issues and other areas of research unpopular with the Trump administration. Now, as Craig LeMoult of member station GBH reports, some scientists with canceled grants are unsure what the ruling means for them.
CRAIG LEMOULT, BYLINE: U.S. District Court Judge William Young ruled the NIH's terminations of those grants were arbitrary and capricious, and he ordered the agency to immediately resume payments. Attorney Rachel Meeropol of the ACLU represents some of the plaintiffs and spoke after the ruling.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
RACHEL MEEROPOL: NIH had come forward with no explanation as to why important medical research that seemed like it would be essential to protect the health of people in this country, why it is all of a sudden on the chopping block. The agency completely failed to explain what it was doing adequately to the American people.
LEMOULT: The judge went on to address what he described as a darker aspect of the case that he said he felt compelled to address. He said the government's termination of grants on topics like health disparities amounted to racial discrimination and discrimination against the LGBTQ population.
ARIEL BECCIA: We are so, I guess, grateful to hear it finally spoken out loud that this is indeed discrimination.
LEMOULT: That's Ariel Beccia of Harvard. Her research is studying mental health inequities experienced by LGBTQ populations during the pandemic.
BECCIA: It makes real tangible difference in the lives of marginalized communities when we have evidence to say, here are the inequities and here are solutions.
LEMOULT: But in March, she got some surprising news.
BECCIA: And it was an email from the NIH saying that, effective immediately, the grant was terminated because its focus no longer aligned with agency priorities.
LEMOULT: On Monday, Judge Young ruled that roughly 800 terminations like that were illegal and are now void. Even so, Beccia says she's not sure yet what the decision means for her and her research.
BECCIA: I'm not sure if my grant is included. I'm reading almost every article I can that's coming out reporting on this court decision, and there's no clear answers yet.
LEMOULT: The list of 800 terminated grants that was referenced in the trial has not been made public. Attorneys for the ACLU say the ruling only applies to parties involved in the lawsuits. That's the researchers who were named plaintiffs, as well as members of the American Public Health Association and the union UAW and researchers at public institutions in the 22 states that also filed suit. Kenneth Parreno is an attorney with the group Protect Democracy, which represented some of those plaintiffs.
KENNETH PARRENO: We're incredibly grateful for the bravery of our clients who have stepped up in this fight. I mean, this is an existential crisis here for science and public health. They put a lot on the line.
LEMOULT: Even for those grants that are clearly included in the judge's ruling, it's not certain yet that they're going to get their funding back. In a written statement, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services said, quote, "HHS stands by its decision to end funding for research that prioritized ideological agendas over scientific rigor and meaningful outcomes for the American people," end quote. The statement goes on to say that HHS is exploring all legal options, including filing an appeal and moving to stay the order.
For NPR News, I'm Craig LeMoult in Boston.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC) Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.