Twenty-two state attorneys general, all Democrats, sued the Trump administration Monday in an attempt to stop it from slashing billions of dollars in health research grant funding for universities. Hours later, a federal district judge in Boston temporarily blocked the cost cuts in those states that had sued earlier in the day. The judge broadened the order early Tuesday morning to apply to all research institutions nationwide. The lawsuit claims that the National Institutes of Health’s “unlawful action” will cause universities and research institutions’ work on curing and treating human disease to grind to a halt. Sen. Susan Collins, the Republican chair of the Senate committee in charge of all government funding, said Monday the Trump administration’s decision to cut $4 billion in health research grant money violated the appropriations law Congress passed last March. Collins added that on Monday she conveyed to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the NIH’s parent agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, her “strong opposition to these arbitrary cuts in funding for vital research.” The administration said Friday it would limit to 15 percent funding added to health research grants to help universities and other grantees cover “indirect” overhead costs. The fees add an average of 27 percent to a grant’s cost but vary considerably. The administration said some research institutions, such as Harvard, Yale and Johns Hopkins, receive an indirect cost add-on equivalent to more than 60 percent of the grant. Not just blue states: “NIH funding goes to every state, and there are many red states where universities received a lot of this funding,” Erik Fatemi, a principal at lobbying firm Cornerstone Government Affairs and former Democratic staffer on the Senate Appropriations subcommittee with authority over health care spending, told Erin. “The response from Republican members of Congress will be critical,” Fatemi said. Besides Collins, Alabama GOP Sen. Katie Britt told a state news outlet that she planned to talk with Kennedy about the change, adding that “a smart, targeted approach is needed in order to not hinder life-saving, groundbreaking research at high-achieving institutions like those in Alabama.” Why it matters: The cuts threaten NIH-funded health and science research, as well as the United States' competitive edge in global biomedical research. Big picture: Budget hawks in conservative circles have wanted to go after indirect research funding for years. In 2017, the Trump administration proposed capping the indirect research funding rate at 10 percent. In response, Congress added language to a 2018 appropriations bill prohibiting it. The provision has been included in every appropriations bill since, including the 2024 bill Collins referenced, which is still in force.
| 
