US judge rejects states’ bid to block Trump diversity research funding cuts


Aug 1 (Reuters) – A federal judge on Friday rejected a bid by 16 Democratic-led states to force U.S. President Donald Trump‘s administration to restore hundreds of millions of dollars of grants it canceled that support increasing diversity in science, technology, engineering and math fields.
Democratic state attorneys general had urged U.S. District Judge John Cronan in Manhattan to block the National Science Foundation from canceling funding awarded to universities designed to increase the participation of women, minorities, and people in those fields, known collectively as STEM.
They had argued in a lawsuit filed in May that the Trump administration lacked the power to cap research funding and eliminate diversity programs provided by the NSF that were mandated by Congress and urged the judge to reverse grant terminations that began in April.
But Cronan, a Trump appointee, agreed with the administration, opens new tab that a challenge to NSF’s already-completed grant terminations could not be pursued in his court but instead could only be taken up by the Court of Federal Claims, a specialist court that hears monetary claims against the U.S. government.
He said the states likewise failed to show a new NSF policy stating that research “must aim to create opportunities for all Americans everywhere” and that research projects that preference “subgroups of people” do not reflect the agency’s priorities was inconsistent with the agency’s governing statute.
The same day that policy was posted in April, NSF began canceling grants that had been previously issued that touched on among other topics of diversity, equity and inclusion. Trump has sought to eliminate DEI from the government and society.
The states said the policy was inconsistent with the National Science Foundation Act’s mandate that the agency award grants “to increase the participation of underrepresented populations in STEM fields.”
But Cronan said NSF’s policy did not require it to cease supporting such projects and that it has in fact continued to fund a number of such projects, including at institutions within the plaintiff states.
“This evidence powerfully undermines Plaintiffs’ argument that the Priority Directive renders this class of projects categorically ineligible for funding,” Cronan wrote.
Ghislaine Maxwell, former associate of late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, has been transferred to a lower-security facility in Texas to continue serving her 20-year
NSF declined to comment. A spokesperson for New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office, which took the lead for the plaintiffs, said it is reviewing the decision.

Related Posts

Authorities explain how they caught Charlie Kirk suspect Tyler Robinson

The suspect was reportedly taken to the police station by his father! After an extensive search authorities believe they have now identified and caught the man responsible…

‘It was a truly historic night for NTAs that saw titans fall’

Last night, the great and good of British TV travelled to the London O2 for the National Television Awards. Yet it wasn’t just stars of the small…

YOU Caused This’: Obama Slammed For His Statement On Charlie Kirk

Barack Obama reacted to Charlie Kirk’s assassination by condemning the violence and offering prayers, but critics slammed his response as “tone deaf.” Fox’s Clay Travis accused Obama…

Mother of transgender athlete speaks out after girls’ volleyball team forfeits rather than compete against her child

A California high school volleyball game ignited heated debate when Riverside Poly High forfeited rather than play against a team with a transgender athlete. Jurupa Valley High’s…

Exploring the Issue: Why Delicate Chains Tangle So Easily

We’ve All Been There: The Necklace Tangle Dilemma You reach for your favorite necklace—only to find it knotted beyond recognition. That delicate chain, once a stunning accessory,…

How many faces are there in the picture?

Visual riddles like this one are more than just fun—they challenge how closely you observe, how patiently you analyze, and how well you think beyond the obvious….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *