Takeaways

• A federal judge declined to reinstate over $1 billion in NSF grants canceled under a new anti-DEI directive.
• The court ruled that challenges to retroactively restore canceled grants must be taken up in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.
• Unions and higher education groups say the decision hurts diversity in STEM fields and undermines innovation.

A federal judge has declined to reinstate more than $1 billion in National Science Foundation (NSF) research grants that were abruptly canceled earlier this year after the agency introduced new funding priorities limiting diversity-related programs.

The decision came after unions and higher education groups sued the NSF in June, arguing that the mass cancellations violated the law and harmed efforts to broaden participation of women, minorities, and people with disabilities in science and engineering.

Read More: DEI in ESG: Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Meaning & Reporting

Background on the Cancellations

In April, the NSF issued a statement of priorities stating that grants “should not preference some groups at the expense of others” or target research with a “narrow impact” on subgroups based on protected characteristics. The new guidelines also discouraged funding for projects linked to environmental justice or studies on disinformation.

The directive led to the termination of 1,600 previously approved grants totaling over $1 billion. Termination notices sent to researchers contained identical language and errors, suggesting a mass, automated cancellation process.

Plaintiffs, including the American Association of Colleges and Universities and the American Association of University Professors, claimed NSF failed to provide any notice or due process before pulling the funding. They argued the cuts undermined Congress’s mandate that the agency expand access for underrepresented groups in STEM.

Judge’s Ruling

In her ruling, U.S. District Judge Catherine Cobb, a Biden appointee, found that while her court could weigh the legality of NSF’s anti-DEI policies for future grants, restoring canceled awards would likely fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

Cobb cited recent Supreme Court precedent involving the National Institutes of Health (NIH), where plaintiffs seeking to reinstate canceled DEI-related grants were directed to the federal claims court. She also found that the plaintiffs’ constitutional claims were weak, saying their arguments were statutory in nature.

Also Read: DEI-Washing? US Companies Fail to Deliver on Diversity Promises

Response and Next Steps

Democracy Forward, the nonprofit representing the plaintiffs, called the decision a setback for American research. “This case is not over and we are eager to defend the important role the NSF plays in the daily lives of Americans,” the group said in a statement.

Critics argue the ruling creates more delays and uncertainty for researchers who have already lost funding, warning that laboratories and projects critical to U.S. competitiveness may collapse without support.

The plaintiffs are now expected to pursue the case in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims while continuing to challenge NSF’s new policies in district court.

Follow more news and views via our Regulators and Featured Articles sections, and stay updated on the top ESG events to attend in 2025 for industry insights and networking.

Source: HIGHER ED DIVE