Trump Administration Admits Using Keywords to Terminate Billions in NIH and Federal Research Grants at University of California
核心洞察
Federal agencies acknowledged using keywords such as "health equity," "vaccine hesitancy," and "structural racism" to screen and terminate over 1,000 UC research grants worth nearly $2 billion.
The NIH alone suspended or cancelled more than 1,000 UC grants, including nearly 700 at UCLA, affecting vaccine research, cancer studies, and health disparities work.
Plaintiffs' lawyers argue the admissions prove First Amendment violations, unconstitutional geographic targeting, and illegal impoundment of Congressionally appropriated funds.
Federal agencies that terminated more than a thousand research grants at the University of California last year have formally admitted in court that they used keyword searches — rather than individual merit reviews — to identify and cancel projects deemed at odds with the Trump administration's priorities. The admission, filed in signed stipulations in the case Thakur v. Trump, marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing legal battle over nearly $2 billion in cancelled research funding.
The agencies acknowledged they "did not terminate any grants based on alleged noncompliance with the terms of the grant" and instead applied "general criteria, rather than grant-specific assessment of each award's compliance, or performance," according to the plaintiffs' legal team. Lawyers for the UC professors now contend this proves three distinct constitutional violations.
Keyword-Based Targeting and First Amendment Claims
The National Institutes of Health admitted to using an internal search tool to flag UC grants containing terms such as "health equity," "work force diversity," "structural racism," and "sexual orientation." The NIH alone suspended or cancelled more than 1,000 UC grants, including nearly 700 at UCLA, encompassing research on vaccines, cancer, and disparities in health outcomes. This figure is newly disclosed — UCLA had previously indicated that closer to 500 NIH grants were terminated.
The Department of Transportation (搜索) identified six grants worth approximately $42 million for termination because they referenced "transportation equity," prioritized "disadvantaged communities," or focused on "diversifying the transportation workforce" and "equity." The cancellation of three grants led by a UC Davis professor resulted in 77 researchers abandoning 79 in-progress projects and forced the layoff or scrambling of funding for more than 40 graduate and undergraduate research assistants.
Plaintiffs' lawyers wrote that the admissions demonstrate the agencies "identified the viewpoints they wanted to suppress, searched the grants they funded for those that expressed those viewpoints, and terminated those grants on that basis," constituting a violation of researchers' First Amendment rights.
Geographic Discrimination and Spending Authority
The plaintiffs further argue that the Department of Energy (搜索) terminated 283 grants from states where a majority voted for Kamala Harris in the 2024 election while leaving untouched hundreds of grants awarded to "red" states, effectively punishing researchers based on their state of residence. Additionally, by terminating billions in grants without rerouting those funds to other opportunities, the administration is alleged to have violated constitutional requirements that the executive branch spend money as Congress directed through appropriations laws.
Legal Proceedings and Judicial Response
Judge Rita F. Lin, a Biden appointee presiding over the case, has repeatedly sided with the UC professors, issuing several preliminary injunctions compelling federal agencies to restore the grants while she reviews the full merits. This includes the restoration of hundreds of grants at UCLA that the administration sought to suspend over allegations concerning antisemitism and transgender athlete participation.
Lin previously faulted the administration for disregarding remedial steps UCLA had taken, writing that the justification for terminating grants did not "mention the remedial steps UCLA had already taken to address the issues described." Those steps included commissioning a task force to recommend ways to create a more welcoming environment for Jewish students, undertaken months before the White House demanded UCLA pay $1.2 billion or face additional research freezes.
The researchers' legal team is now asking Judge Lin to skip a trial and issue a final ruling permanently restoring the grants. A court hearing on that motion is scheduled for October 20. Even with a favorable ruling, federal agencies could appeal to a higher court.
The NIH also disclosed that it is possible DOGE, the short-lived federal office led by billionaire Elon Musk in 2025, used artificial intelligence to target grants for termination.
Broader Implications
The stakes "are huge," the plaintiffs' lawyers wrote, warning that if the White House is "allowed to terminate this funding, the researchers, graduate students, and program staff that relied on the grants to pursue their lives' work will all suffer significant damage to their reputations and careers." They cautioned that lifesaving cures may never be developed, new understandings of diseases will go unexplored, and the country's global standing in publicly funded research could decline.
The Environmental Protection Agency (搜索), one of the named agencies in the suit, is in the process of settling with lawyers for the UC professors to avoid further litigation. Separately, a federal district judge in Massachusetts last week ruled against the administration's use of the phrase "no longer effectuates agency priorities" to cancel funding, agreeing with California and 22 other states that no legal basis exists for such cancellations after grants have been awarded.