Administration of Trump called upon to partially reinstate funding for UCLA, following negotiations for a $1 billion settlement
In a significant development, federal courts have ordered the reinstatement of research grants that were arbitrarily terminated or suspended by the Trump administration. The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Rita Lin, affects hundreds of grants at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and across the University of California (UC) system.
The class action lawsuit, filed by six UC researchers, challenges the arbitrary termination and suspension of research grants, particularly those related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and environmental projects. Judge Lin's ruling emphasizes that the National Science Foundation (NSF) violated a preliminary injunction by suspending about 300 UCLA grants.
Judge Lin's decision comes after the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the Trump administration’s request to stay the injunction that requires the reinstatement of these grants. The court found insufficient justification for the administration's actions and allowed the flow of federal funds to persist despite the administration's executive orders.
Claudia Polsky, a UC Berkeley law professor who spearheaded the class action lawsuit, praised Judge Lin's ruling. Polsky stated that the suspension actions, like the prior terminations, unlawfully failed to contain grant-specific rationales for halting grants mid-stream.
The University of California school system has stated that the restoration of National Science Foundation funds is critical to the research they perform. The funding from the NSF could be worth over an estimated $101 million across 306 grant projects.
The Trump administration had suspended some $584 million in federal grants for UCLA, roughly a third of which are from the National Science Foundation. The administration proposed a $1 billion settlement with UCLA last week to restore funding. However, Judge Rita Lin did not address the Trump administration's argument that the UCLA cuts were "suspensions" rather than "terminations" in her ruling.
The review of grants terminated across the UC system by the NSF, according to the lawsuit, took place because the grant titles included "DEI-related words" like "equity." The lawsuit did not directly involve the University of California school system, which was not a party to the lawsuit.
The current status of the class action lawsuit is that federal courts have ordered the reinstatement of research grants that were arbitrarily terminated or suspended. The restoration of National Science Foundation funds is critical to the research performed by the University of California school system, as stated earlier. The legal process will continue as the case proceeds.
- The reinstatement of research grants, valued at over $101 million across 306 projects, is crucial for the University of California school system, following the federal courts' order.
- The class action lawsuit, filed by six UC researchers, contests the arbitrary termination and suspension of grants, inclusive of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and environmental projects.
- Judge Rita Lin's ruling asserts that the National Science Foundation (NSF) violated a preliminary injunction by suspending about 300 UCLA grants, particularly those related to DEI and environmental projects.
- The Trump administration's argument that the UCLA cuts were "suspensions" rather than "terminations" was not addressed in Judge Rita Lin's ruling.
- The review of grants terminated across the UC system by the NSF, initiated reportedly because grant titles included "DEI-related words" like "equity," is part of the ongoing class action lawsuit.
- The legal process will continue as the case proceeds in regards to the reinstatement of research grants that were arbitrarily terminated or suspended, as mandated by federal courts.
