After the first grant termination rolled into Professor Cheri Levinson’s inbox, her university told her it wasn’t worth taking the time to appeal the decision; the odds of success were too low. Ultimately, she had three National Institutes of Health grants terminated that were meant to support trainees from diverse backgrounds in her lab studying eating disorders at the University of Louisville.
But her state’s Republican attorney general didn’t join AGs from other states, most of them blue states, who sued the Trump administration to block the grant cancellations. So two weeks ago, when many researchers exhaled in relief as a federal judge ruled that a wide swath of the terminations were illegal, and ordered them reinstated, Levinson wasn’t one of them.
U.S. District Judge William G. Young’s decision applied only to a subset of grants submitted by the AGs and another group of plaintiffs, meaning his reprieve will largely not be extended to researchers who happen to be in Republican states. Scientists in Democratic congressional districts stand to have $2.1 billion in grants reinstated, compared to $62 million in Republican districts, according to a STAT analysis.
This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers
Unlock this article — plus daily intelligence on Capitol Hill and the life sciences industry — by subscribing to STAT+.
Already have an account? Log in
