Forty-five cities, counties and mayors nationwide filed an amicus brief on Thursday in a lawsuit against the National Institutes of Health for its decision to limit indirect funding for health research grants to 15 percent. The fees, which cover overhead costs, add an average of 27 percent to the cost of a grant but vary considerably. The Trump administration says some large research institutions, such as Harvard, Yale and Johns Hopkins, receive an indirect cost add-on equivalent to more than 60 percent of the grant. After 22 states sued NIH, a federal district court judge in Boston temporarily blocked the cuts on Feb. 10. University, hospital and public health groups filed their own lawsuit to block the cuts. Inside the amicus brief: Also known as “friend of the court” briefs, the briefs are submitted by those not involved in a lawsuit to help the court in its decisionmaking. The cities, counties and mayors made a business case against the NIH cuts in their brief, arguing that hiring freezes, layoffs, lost jobs and fewer clinical trials resulting from the funding loss would trigger a “severe economic hit to many of our most critical anchor institutions, imperiling their positions as key economic drivers in our communities.” Economic impact and fallout, by the numbers: — Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, the largest university recipient of NIH funds in 2023, is also the city’s largest private employer, providing nearly 17,000 jobs. JHU’s estimated economic impact on the city is $7.3 billion. — Cleveland: Case Western, Cleveland Clinic and Cleveland State University stand to lose $65 million in NIH funding. Statewide, NIH grants generated an estimated $3.3 billion in economic activity. — Harris County, Texas: Texas Medical Center, whose members include Rice University, the University of Houston and the Texas Heart Institute, provides more than 120,000 jobs in the county, driving more than $24 billion in economic activity in the Houston area. — Pittsburgh: Cutting the $8.3 million that Carnegie Mellon University receives in annual indirect costs would jeopardize “all” of its current federally funded projects. That research disruption would mean immediate staffing reductions for researchers in Pittsburgh. The brief cites a report from United for Medical Research, a coalition of research institutes, patient advocates and businesses, which found that NIH research funding supported 412,041 jobs and $92.89 billion in economic activity in 2021. The “arbitrary and unlawful change to a decades-old funding system” would lower cities’ real estate value and tax revenue, effects that would ripple nationally, the brief says. What's next: During a hearing Friday morning, Judge Angel Kelley said she would extend her temporary restraining order on the cuts until she rules on whether to order a preliminary injunction. Kelley added that given the importance of the issue, she would make her decision as quickly as she could.
| 
