Professor Cheri Levinson faced a devastating blow when three of her National Institutes of Health grants supporting trainees from diverse backgrounds in her lab studying eating disorders at the University of Louisville were terminated. Despite the university advising her against appealing the decision due to low chances of success, she was determined to fight for her research.
However, her efforts were hindered by her state’s Republican attorney general who did not join other AGs in suing the Trump administration to block the grant cancellations. This put Professor Levinson in a difficult position, as she watched researchers in Democratic states celebrate a federal judge’s ruling that deemed the terminations illegal and ordered them to be reinstated.
Unfortunately, U.S. District Judge William G. Young’s decision only applied to a specific subset of grants submitted by the AGs and other plaintiffs, leaving researchers in Republican states, like Professor Levinson, out of luck. According to a STAT analysis, scientists in Democratic congressional districts are set to have $2.1 billion in grants reinstated, while those in Republican districts only stand to gain $62 million.
The unequal distribution of grant reinstatements highlights the disparity in research funding based on political affiliations. While researchers in blue states are able to continue their important work with renewed support, those in red states are left struggling to secure funding for their projects.
It is crucial for the scientific community to come together and advocate for fair and equal distribution of research funds, regardless of political boundaries. Every researcher, regardless of their state or district, deserves the opportunity to pursue innovative research that can benefit society as a whole.
