On Thursday, the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to grant them a stay on the Massachusetts vs Kennedy/ APHA vs NIH ruling. This decision will occur on the shadow docket, with no formal hearing.
Jenna Norton
👇👇👇👇
I am one of these faces.
I certainly do feel like my life has been turned upside down multiple times this year, but I will always love my #NIHMOSAIC family and I am so glad we have people like @jeremymberg.bsky.social fighting for us ❤️
Sometimes you don’t realize the full burden you’ve been carrying –of being implicitly treated as a second-class citizen whose life isn’t worth preserving, of people working to fix health inequalities in this country being persecuted, of the crushing *silence* around it – until someone calls it out.
Public comment on this new "no animal only studies" is open here:
www.fda.gov/news-events/...
It closes next Monday.
I have certainly lost a lot of hope in this process, but it is nice to see some people are still advocating for us. Thanks @jeremymberg.bsky.social
The end of biomedical sciences has finally arrived: NIH announces end to funding for animal-only studies www.drugdiscoverytrends.com/nih-announce...
The NIH can’t award ANY grants to outside researchers under new WH restriction, reports @wsj.com.
The pause came in the form of a footnote from OMB Director Vought, in a document that doles out federal funds to the NIH.
Prelude to rescissions, especially after his comments over the weekend?
Eliza Bliss-Moreau
Erica Rodriguez, PhD
Erica Rodriguez, PhD
Isabel
An NIH staffer reacts to today's ruling:
"I'm looking forward to the day that we are so slammed with work trying to reinstate everything that we had to terminate illegally — I'll work 24/7 to make that happen if I can."
DrGlitterbear
Max Kozlov
The full ruling explaining why NIH grant cuts are illegal came out today.
It's just as blistering as the judge's oral remarks. And it uncovers fresh details in DOGE's role orchestrating the cuts — and on the cuts at Columbia.
Here are my top highlights from the 103-page ruling. 🧵
Jay Bhattacharya seemed genuinely surprised to learn that diversity applicants compete in the same payline with applicants to standard opportunities. So terminating these grants (when they outperformed their peers) is blatant discrimination.
Yet, we would not commit to correcting this
Jenna Norton
🚨 BREAKING: Nearly 4 months the NIH cut its first grants, a judge has ruled that the directives and process that led to cuts are arbitrary and capricious.
"The explanations are bereft of reasoning — virtually in their entirety... unsupported by [facts]."
Each of them are VOID and ILLEGAL, he says.
The line between “no Medicaid for you” and “the only option for access to ‘health care’ if you don’t have insurance is participating in risky, untested interventions” is a short one.
Animal models are the bridge from bench to bedside.
MORE YOUNG: "It is palpably clear that these directives and the set of terminated grants here also are designed to frustrate, to stop, research that may bear on the health – we’re talking about health here, the health of Americans, of our LGBTQ community. That’s appalling."
