Judge Blocks Federal Government From Cutting Medical Research Funding

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley entered a temporary restraining order on Feb. 10 preventing the federal government from cutting medical research funding in 22 states in response to a lawsuit filed in federal court in Massachusetts.

The order is in place until further word from the court, Kelley said.

Government lawyers were also ordered to, within 24 hours, and at biweekly intervals thereafter, confirm with the judge that they are regularly disbursing medical research funding in the states, which include Arizona, California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, and Oregon.

California, New York, and Massachusetts receive the most funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

The legal challenge targets the U.S. National Institutes of Health directive that imposes a lower cap on indirect research costs for institutions receiving government funding after a quarter of $35 billion in NIH research funds went to indirect costs in 2024.

The new cap was set in the Feb. 7 directive at 15 percent, which is largely in line with private funding limits, and down from what the NIH said was an average of 27 percent to 28 percent.

“The United States should have the best medical research in the world. It is accordingly vital to ensure that as many funds as possible go towards direct scientific research costs rather than administrative overhead,” according to an NIH memorandum from the agency’s Office of the Director.

Dr. Matthew Memoli is the acting NIH director while the Senate considers President Donald Trump’s nominee, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya.

In an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order, attorneys general representing the states alleged that institutions, if the change were allowed to go through, would lead to “catastrophic financial consequences, which could result in layoffs and furloughs, research program closures, financial defaults, and disruptions to clinical trials, potentially jeopardizing people’s lives and health.”

The states also said the change violates a law that prohibits the NIH from changing the cap on indirect research costs.

“Even were NIH to have the authority it claims, a demanding regulatory process would be required; but NIH took none of the steps mandated by that process. In addition, the agency did not consider the detrimental effect of its decision on ongoing research that NIH itself has determined is integral to public health,” the motion stated. 

“Nor did NIH address the considerable reliance interests that are impaired when thousands of existing grants, totaling billions of dollars, are changed unilaterally over a weekend.”

The government has not issued a response to the motion.

After granting the request for a restraining order, Kelley set a hearing on the matter for Feb. 21.