Overview from Inside Higher Ed (May 29)

White House Aims to Establish Political Oversight of Federal Grants

“The White House is advancing a sweeping rule change that would give administration officials more power over billions of dollars in federal grants. The regulations seek to codify that Trump officials have the right to keep doing what they started last year: canceling thousands of grants that they said didn’t align with the president’s priorities, and shooting down new ones for the same reason. … The White House Office of Management and Budget told Inside Higher Ed the changes would allow the administration to curtail grants unaligned with Trump’s EOs and policies, adding that “grantees out of alignment may now be suspended or terminated.” Those grantees include universities whose researchers receive National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation and other federal agency grants.

“ … Jules Barbati-Dajches, an analyst for the Union of Concerned Scientists’ Center for Science and Democracy, said in an email to Inside Higher Ed that “placing political appointees in the position to review and determine funding would replace merit with loyalty to a political leader.”

“The proposal also, according to OMB, bans “grants that push disparate impact liability theories, discriminatory event services, DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion], gender ideology” and “child sex mutilation”—the term the administration uses for gender-affirming care—while also prohibiting “agencies from excluding faith-based organizations and applicants.” The proposal also “wipes out Green New Scam grant requirements and a public sector worker preference in evaluating grant proposals,” while also forbidding “grants for voter registration campaigns, issue advocacy, or political activities.”

See also the coverage from Scientific American, "White House proposes new rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants" (May 28, via Yahoo News)

Analysis and Calls for Public Comments

Stand Up for Science has set up a comment form online: “Add Your Voice to Stop OMB's Attack on American Science” “[OMB Director] Russell Vought is trying to destroy American science & federally funded research as we know it with OMB’s proposed “Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance” rule. Please join with Stand Up for Science to stop this attack on science by adding your feedback and comments to the Federal Register during the public comment period, open until July 13, 2026.” SUFS is also organizing an "Emergency Science Meeting" online, Tuesday, June 2, 2026 · 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

Theoretical physicist and Black feminist theorist Chanda Prescod-Weinstein posted analysis on her website, “It's the End of American Science As We Know It” (May 29) “While the Trump administration has already done egregious damage to science, today the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) unveiled major changes to how federal funding is allocated and distributed. For the first time, they are sharing their plans to permanently and systematically move American science from a system that values evidence-based evaluations to a political patronage system.”

Prescod-Weinstein also references a post by former NIH program official Elizabeth Ginexi on her website, “Summary of Key Changes in OMB’s Proposed Federal Financial Assistance Rule” (May 28) “Russell Vought is going to destroy American Science.”

Ginexi subsequently posted, “What We Need to do NEXT: OMB’s Proposed Federal Financial Assistance Rule” (May 29) That post includes a series of recommendations for public comments on the proposed rule. 

The Federal Register notice on the proposed rule is online here. The comment period ends July 13, 2026.

Apparently unrelated to this proposed rule, see the previous DCSS news item, “New Grant Disruptions at NSF”