In conclusion
According to UC researchers, a judge’s earlier ruling prohibited the National Science Foundation from halting UCLA’s awards.
Greetings from CalMatters, the only nonprofit news organization dedicated exclusively to reporting on topics that impact all Californians. To get the most recent information and analysis on the most significant topics in the Golden State, sign up for WhatMatters.
Today, a federal judge instructed attorneys for the Trump administration to explain why the National Science Foundation’s decision to suspend around 300 grants from UCLA last week did not conflict with the judge’s June order prohibiting the agency from canceling any funds.
Rita F. Lin, the judge of the California district court, scheduled a hearing for August 12. Lin’s order responds to a filing made by attorneys for researchers from the University of California on Monday. In their letter to Lin, they demanded that the suspensions from last week be lifted by the Science Foundation. Their submission is a component of a pending lawsuit that contested the legitimacy of the National Science Foundation’s decision to terminate 114 UC awards this spring due to purported violations of diversity, equity, and inclusion. In June, Lin issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the Science Foundation from terminating any more funds and directing them to restore the grants.
The National Science Foundation’s decision to suspend UCLA’s awards last week is being challenged in court for the first time, according to the UC academics’ attorneys. The suspensions, according to the science agency’s attorneys at the Federal Department of Justice, do not contravene Lin’s June preliminary order.
READ NEXT
UCLA research grants suspended after Trump administration faulted campus for antisemitism
The most recent debate demonstrates how new and ongoing legal issues reinforce one another. Additionally, it is the most recent phase of the Trump administration’s multifaceted strategy to punish colleges for alleged DEI infractions and revoke funding for academic research.The Trump administration has come under fire from several federal judges for failing to define DEI and yet denying schools funds because of those violations.
About $170 million in grant funding is on hold as a result of last week’s bans, and UCLA researchers are unable to use any remaining funds to carry out their investigations. One of the biggest providers of university grants for scientific research is the National Science Foundation. To make scientific discoveries, train graduate students, and maintain the research infrastructure that has made the United States perhaps the world’s leader in scientific discovery, campuses depend on the funding.
The UCLA sanctions came after a federal Department of Justice report released last week that charged the university with failing to adequately combat antisemitism, especially in relation to incidents that occurred during the pro-Palestine demonstrations last year. The report was released months after UCLA appointed a task committee to look into campus antisemitism and provide recommendations that the university’s administrators promised to follow.According to the Department of Justice, UCLA has until today to indicate that it is open to reaching a consensus on antisemitism. If not, the agency stated that by September 2, it will lodge a complaint in a federal court.
How a June court case is related to UCLA suspensions
The National Science Foundation withdrew 114 awards to UCLA in the spring, but Lin ordered the agency to reinstate them in June. Additionally, she prohibited the government from freezing the majority of other grants. Two other agencies that terminated UC grants were instructed by Lin to follow suit. The National Endowment for the Humanities and the Environmental Protection Agency. While all three organizations returned the grants to UC researchers by mid-July, the later two agencies appealed that judgment.Two categories of awards were impacted by Lin’s order: those that the federal agencies said violated President Donald Trump’s DEI funding bans, or those that they canceled using a termination form that contained general or ambiguous wording about the project not matching agency priorities.
Following the Science Foundation’s Wednesday suspension of UCLA’s funds, attorneys for the UC researchers wrote to the district court judge on Monday, claiming the organization was in violation of her order because the suspensions effectively stopped the grant financing.Federal Department of Justice attorneys responded to Lin’s letter on Monday by stating that a suspension is not the same as a termination, which is what Lin prohibited in her preliminary injunction from June. Additionally, they claim that the suspensions were not based on Trump’s executive orders but rather on the Science Foundation’s allegations that UCLA has not done enough to combat antisemitism on campus, uses race-based admissions, and permits transgender women to participate in women’s sports. On August 1, Lisa Scott-Morring, an administrator with the National Science Foundation, wrote to UCLA outlining all three arguments.Since voters outlawed racial discrimination in 1996, California has prohibited public universities from accepting students on the basis of race. Although the school insists it does not practice affirmative action, Scott-Morring stated in her letter to UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk that its holistic review admissions method is de facto race-based admissions.According to Scott-Morring, the National Science Foundation thinks that UCLA’s holistic review admissions process, which takes into account an applicant’s family income, school profile, and neighborhood/zip code in addition to asking applicants to disclose their race through personal statements, is an open attempt to practice race-based admissions.
While the Supreme Court in 2023 overturned the use of race in college admissions in a 6-3 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote on behalf of the majority that students are free to discuss their identities and overcoming hardships in admissions essays.Nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise,Roberts wrote.All three criticisms in Scott-Morring s lettermatchthepoliciesTrump is pursuing through executive actions to reshape higher education and the federal government. They also resemble the policy playbook fleshed out inProject 2025, a conservative publication thathas shaped Trump s current term in office.
NSF is willing to work with UCLA to identify corrective actions to bring UCLA into compliance. UCLA must acknowledge in writing its willingness to discuss these corrective actions by August 15, Scott-Morring wrote.Lawyers for the UC professors argued that the Scott-Morring letters aren t strong enough justifications to suspend the grants. Both letters entirely fail to explain why the specific project was found to be incompatible with the Agency s priorities, the lawyers wrote to Lin on Monday. They stress the lack of explanation for why individual awards were terminated because that was one of their winning arguments that led Lin to order the grants reinstated in June.And they argue that the distinction between a termination and a suspension is purely semantic because either way, researchers cannot access their funding.
NSF has violated the Preliminary Injunction and must immediately rescind the suspension of grants implicated in the July 30 and August 1 Letters, the lawyers for the UC researchers wrote on Monday.
READ NEXT
Trump cancelled millions in California research grants. Judges want to restore them
Another casualty of Trump research cuts? California students who want to be scientists
CalMatters has further information.
Text
Receive breaking news on your mobile device.
Get it here
Use our app to stay up to date.
Register
Get free updates delivered straight to your inbox.
Nonpartisan, independent California news for all
CalMatters is your impartial, nonprofit news source.
Our goal remains crucial, and our journalists are here to empower you.
-
We are independent and nonpartisan.
Our trustworthy journalism is free from partisan politics, free from corporate influence and actually free for all Californians. -
We are focused on California issues.
From the environment to homelessness, economy and more, we publish the unfettered truth to keep you informed. -
We hold people in power accountable.
We probe and reveal the actions and inactions of powerful people and institutions, and the consequences that follow.
However, without the help of readers like you, we are unable to continue.
Give what you can now, please. Every gift makes a difference.
