Diving brief:
- Sixteen states continued the National Science Foundation Wednesday on the agency Cap on the financing of general research costs And its massive end of subsidies linked to diversity, equity and other subjects deemed Verboten by the Trump administration.
- The applicants allege that the two movements violate federal law And threaten the main research projects and millions of dollars in federal funding in the universities of their states. An NSF spokesperson refused to comment on the trial.
- The States of Pursuit – all of which all have democratic prosecutors – asked a federal judge in New York to block the indirect cost ceiling of NSF and its April Directive less subsidies related to diversity.
Diving insight:
On April 18, the scientific research agency – which was founded in 1950 and had a budget of $ 9 billion in the last year – published a statement announcing that it would favor research focused on the creation of “possibilities for all Americans around the world”.
“Research projects having a closer impact limited to the subgroups of people on the basis of the class or the protected characteristics have not affected the priorities of the NSF,” said the agency at the time.
On the same day, the NSF began to issue mass dismissal opinions for projects that seek to strengthen participation in scientific fields by “women, minorities and disabled people”, according to Wednesday’s complaint. Studies on disinformation and environmental justice have also received dismissal opinions.
The canceled projects include A study by the University of Delaware on post-traumatic stress disorder and suicidality among veterans; A new doctoral program in New Jersey promoting the increased participation of under-represented groups in doctorates linked to science; And an initiative of the University of Oregon offering some 20,000 students learning experiences in computer science.
Later, in May, NSF went to the ceiling Reimbursement of indirect research costs at 15% for all new grants issued to colleges. Cups affect funding for Equipment, administrative staff, laboratory construction and other expenses in research programs.
The financing ceiling has already triggered at least Another legal actiona group of higher education associations.
The change could lead to strong financial and infrastructure damage to university research programs on which the government is based to advance knowledge and technology in the country, argued the complainants of the state.
According to the trial on Wednesday, the “vast majority” of university projects in the applicant’s states had negotiated indirect research rates between 40% and 60% with the NSF. The “institutions of these states will not be able to maintain essential research infrastructures and will be forced to retreat considerably or stop research, abandon numerous projects and dismiss the staff,” said the complainants.
In both cases – the April directive and the indirect cost ceiling – the NSF violated the law, states said.
In the case of the April Directive, the complainants underlined statutes which explicitly order the agency to promote scientific participation among the under-represented groups in the United States
They also argue that long -standing policy has worked, citing statistics showing that the number of women in scientific and engineering professions or with related diplomas doubled between 1995 and 2017. Participation in these areas by those of minority groups increased from 15% to 35% during the period.
The complainants also argued that the indirect cost ceiling is undergoing a federal law ordering the NSF to support fundamental scientific and educational research programs.
Under the Trump administration this year, the National Health Institutes And the United States Energy department also adopted similar ceilings of 15% on the reimbursement of general costs. The courts have blocked the two policies, although business is underway.