The U.S. Supreme Court, in a sharply divided decision, allowed the Trump administration to temporarily halt millions of dollars in medical research grants that officials say conflict with the president’s policy priorities.
The administration argued before the court that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) was being compelled to continue distributing $783 million, though opponents questioned that figure.
The justices partially stayed a federal trial judge’s ruling that the NIH acted in an “arbitrary and capricious” manner when it cut thousands of grants as part of President Donald Trump’s crackdown on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.
However, the court did maintain a block on NIH guidance documents that bar funding for research related to DEI, gender identity, vaccine hesitancy, Covid, or climate change.
On a 5-4 vote, the justices indicated that U.S. District Judge William Young in Boston lacked jurisdiction to order the reinstatement of specific grants. Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court’s three liberal members in dissent on this point.
The challengers—including research organizations and states with universities dependent on NIH funding—warned that the grant suspension could set back vital research by years, if not decades.
“A stay would abruptly, and in many cases permanently, halt lifesaving biomedical research that Congress has directed the NIH to fund, with irreparable consequences for scientific progress,” the groups, led by the American Public Health Organization, argued in court filings.
The administration maintained that the NIH was being forced to continue payouts of $783 million, a figure the challengers disputed.
“The government is irreparably harmed when forced to pay out millions of dollars on discretionary grants, with no guarantee of recouping the money,” wrote U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer, the administration’s top Supreme Court lawyer, in court papers.
The case is National Institutes of Health v. American Public Health Association, 25A103.
