In a fractured ruling, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that the Trump administration could for now cancel more than $780 million in grants from the National Institutes of Health that the government said had been intended to explore topics like diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, “gender ideology” and vaccine hesitancy.
But a different five-justice majority let stand for now a lower court’s ruling that the administration’s underlying policy directing the cuts was probably unlawful and should be put on hold.
Only Justice Amy Coney Barrett was in both majorities.
The court’s order is not the last word, and the case will proceed in lower courts. The upshot of the scrambled ruling, subject to ongoing litigation, appears to be that grants already canceled will not be immediately reinstated but that recipients may be able to sue in a specialized court. Further cancellations may be barred.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Barrett wrote that challenges to individual grant terminations had probably been filed in the wrong court. But she said the challenge to the policy guidance had been filed in the correct court.
Still, she added, “whether claims about the guidance in this case will succeed is another question” but the lower court judge’s ruling could remain in place for now.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and the court’s three liberal members — Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — would have blocked the policy and also restored the funding. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh would have allowed the Trump policy and the cuts to be implemented.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Already a subscriber? Log in.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
The post Supreme Court Lets Trump Administration Cut N.I.H. Grants for Disfavored Research appeared first on New York Times.
