President Donald Trump’s assault on federal spending, climate science and diversity initiatives is fueling an existential crisis for the nation’s vast web of research institutions — and the scientists who power them.
The administration is seeking to thwart research it considers a threat to Trump’s agenda — including anything connected to climate science or diversity, equity and inclusion, writes Chelsea Harvey. It has frozen billions of dollars in federal funding, paused grant reviews and cut critical support for university research.
The language in Trump’s directives is so broad that universities and research institutions worry that projects that make mere mention of gender, race or equity could be on the chopping block. At least one university told researchers that even terms such as biodiversity could be flagged by AI-based grant review systems looking for DEI proposals.
Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas has added to the alarm by launching an online database last week identifying more than 3,400 grants funded by the National Science Foundation that he said promote “advanced neo-Marxist class warfare propaganda.”
Federal courts have begun pushing back on some of Trump’s moves — by ordering an end to a sweeping funding freeze, for example — but the administration has been slow to comply and remained steadfast in its attempts to gut science agencies. The atmosphere of fear and confusion is leading some university supervisors to quietly advise faculty to censor their research proposals and other public-facing documents to comply with Trump’s directives.
A professor at one U.S. university, who was granted anonymity, told Chelsea they were recently advised to remove terms including “climate change” and “greenhouse gas emissions” from research papers and other public documents.
While past administrations have steered the focus of U.S. research in new directions — from nanotechnology to cancer research — those priorities were typically additive; they didn’t restrict research in other areas.
Trump’s approach “will have long-term harmful consequences,” said Matt Owens, president of the Council on Government Relations, an association of academic research institutions.
“One of our strengths as a nation is the federal government has invested across the board in curiosity-driven research, because over time this pays dividends,” he told Chelsea. “So an erosion of broad federal support for all areas of research will damage our ability to remain the global science and innovation leader.”
