Federal judge strikes down NIH directives against DEI research

Dive Brief:

A federal judge on Monday vacated the National Institutes of Health’s directives to eliminate research funding for diversity, equity and inclusion-related projects.
In February, NIH began terminating grants for research related to DEI, LGBTQ+ issues and gender identity, drawing separate lawsuits from researchers and unions and a coalition of 16 states. The former argued the cuts were “a reckless and illegal purge” of diverse research topics that NIH is legally required to study.
U.S. District Judge William Young ordered NIH to reinstate the plaintiffs’ canceled research funding. The American Civil Liberties Union, which helped challenge the directives, called the ruling “a major victory for public health” on Monday.

Dive Insight:

This year, NIH notified grant recipients that DEI-related research no longer carried out its priorities. 

A plaintiff whose research focuses on sexual violence in minority communities had six grants terminated, the ACLU lawsuit alleged. Another cut grant had funded a study seeking to develop interventions to reduce drug use and promote mental and physical health in Black men.

One version of NIH’s grant termination letters alleged that DEI-related studies are “often used to support unlawful discrimination on the basis of race and other protected characteristics, which harms the health of Americans.”

But Young, a Reagan appointee, said Monday that he saw no evidence supporting that claim, Axios reported.

The judge did not waste words during the hearing.

“I’ve never seen government racial discrimination like this,” Young said, according to The Associated Press. He also said that “discrimination against America’s LGBTQ community” was behind the government’s actions.

“Have we no shame,” Young said before ending the hearing.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which houses NIH, is exploring its legal options, including “an appeal and moving to stay the order,” Andrew Nixon, the agency’s communications director, said in a statement Tuesday.

“HHS stands by its decision to end funding for research that prioritized ideological agendas over scientific rigor and meaningful outcomes for the American people,” Nixon said.

The agency also moved to block funding for research that addressed vaccine hesitancy, reflecting the vaccine skepticism of U.S. Secretary of Health Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Olga Akselrod, senior counsel for the ACLU’s Racial Justice Program, said Monday that Young’s ruling confirms that “science must be guided by evidence, not ideology.”

“By blocking NIH’s unlawful directive, the court has protected the integrity of scientific research and ensured that critical studies, especially those focused on underserved and marginalized communities, can continue without political interference,” Akselrod said in a statement. 

Brittany Charlton, a public health professor at Harvard University and one of the plaintiffs, described the ruling as restoring “important research projects that should never have been disrupted.”

According to the lawsuit, NIH terminated five of Charlton’s grants. One focused on obstetrical outcomes for lesbian, gay, bisexual and queer women, while another sought to study the mental health impacts of laws targeting the LGBTQ+ population. 

Young’s call for funding reinstatement affects about 800 grants, according to Science. That’s a fraction of the grants NIH canceled in just over three months.

About 2,300 NIH grants — equaling nearly $3.8 billion of funding — were terminated as of June 4, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges.