The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is being scrutinized by the courts over allegations that the current administration is unlawfully obstructing its grant-making process.

In February, under updated guidelines, NIH said it would now apply a standard indirect cost rate of 15% to all new and existing grants, replacing the previous practice of negotiating separate rates for each grant.

In March, a federal court issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against the NIH following its abrupt decision to slash and cap indirect cost rates on biomedical research grants.

The ruling prevents the implementation of the policy change, affecting billions of dollars in funding and disrupting ongoing research and clinical trials.

Last week, sixteen state attorneys general filed a complaint against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) over research grant terminations.

Plaintiffs argue that the White House has launched a coordinated campaign to delay and terminate NIH grants, undermining scientific progress and threatening the economic and health benefits that stem from NIH-funded research.

NIH is the largest public funder of medical research globally, credited with catalyzing transformative breakthroughs such as the rubella vaccine, treatments for HIV/AIDS, and the discovery of the BRCA mutation linked to breast and ovarian cancer.

In fiscal year 2024 alone, NIH distributed over $36 billion in research awards, generating more than $94 billion in economic activity and supporting over 407,000 jobs across the United States. According to the lawsuit filed on Friday, that progress is now at risk.

Since January, the NIH has allegedly halted or indefinitely delayed reviews of fundable grant applications and canceled critical meetings by review panels. Even applications that passed scientific and advisory review stages have reportedly been left without final decisions.

The plaintiffs claim this violates the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires agencies to act within a reasonable time and breaches constitutional separation-of-powers principles.

The legal filing also challenges NIH's termination of hundreds of existing grants.

Plaintiffs say these cancellations are politically motivated, citing boilerplate justifications tied to topics like diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), transgender issues, and vaccine hesitancy—areas purportedly out of favor with the current administration.

The lawsuit argues that these terminations lack a lawful basis and fail to offer legitimate explanations or consider the broader implications.

These disruptions have already inflicted substantial damage. For instance, the University of Massachusetts has rescinded dozens of graduate school offers due to funding uncertainty, derailing its biomedical sciences program and jeopardizing ongoing research.

Plaintiffs warn that unless the court intervenes, the harm to public institutions and national scientific leadership will continue to grow.

The lawsuit seeks immediate judicial intervention to compel the NIH to resume its lawful grant-review process and reinstate improperly terminated awards.

Read Next:

• Rhythm Pharmaceuticals' Weight Loss Drug Study Shows Significant BMI Reduction For Rare Type Of Obesity Disorder

Image via Shutterstock