Judge Blocks Proposed Cuts to Critical Medical Research Funding
In a significant legal development, a federal judge has halted plans by the Trump administration to significantly reduce funding for medical research. This decision comes after widespread concerns from the scientific community about the potential risks to patient care and job security.
The proposed policy from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) aimed to eliminate substantial financial support for indirect costs associated with research on a range of serious illnesses, including Alzheimer’s, cancer, and heart disease. These expenses encompass essential administrative and operational costs necessary for conducting clinical trials and foundational lab research.
A coalition of 23 states, along with associations representing universities, hospitals, and research institutions, challenged the cuts in court, arguing they would inflict “irreparable harm” and were not legally justified.
U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley in Boston, who had already temporarily suspended the cuts, issued a preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo as the lawsuits proceed. This decision extends the temporary block on the cuts, providing a reprieve for affected institutions.
The NIH, a pivotal source of biomedical research funding, allocated approximately $35 billion in grants last year. These grants cover both “direct” costs, such as researchers’ salaries and lab supplies, and “indirect” costs, which include necessary administrative and facility expenses.
Under the previous system, indirect costs were negotiated with each institution. For example, a project with a 50% indirect cost rate would receive an additional $50,000 for a $100,000 grant. However, the new policy proposed a flat rate of 15% for these costs, projecting savings of $4 billion annually.
Dr. David J. Skorton, representing the Association of American Medical Colleges, expressed approval of the ruling. He stated, “These unlawful cuts would slow medical progress and cost lives,” emphasizing the widespread benefits of NIH-funded research.
The Department of Health and Human Services, which manages the NIH, has not yet commented on the ruling.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel highlighted the potential impact of the cuts in Michigan, where research at major universities stood to lose up to $200 million. She remarked, “Our colleges and universities are at the forefront of groundbreaking advancements… This preliminary injunction ensures that their essential work can continue without disruption.”
Nessel further warned of the devastating consequences had the cuts proceeded, including job losses, halted research programs, and missed medical breakthroughs. She underscored the importance of ongoing NIH-supported trials in the state and vowed to protect federal funding and uphold the rule of law.
—
Read More Michigan News
