New Executive Order Gives Trump Greater Control Over Science Grants

Published in Science and Technology on Saturday, August 9th 2025 at 11:32 GMT by Forbes
^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order that will give him and his political appointees unprecedented control over grants from the NIH, NSF and other agencies.

Trump's New Executive Order: Tightening Grip on Federal Science Funding

In a move that has sent ripples through the scientific community, President Donald Trump has issued a sweeping executive order aimed at reshaping how federal grants for scientific research are allocated and overseen. The order, signed amid growing tensions between the administration and various scientific bodies, grants the executive branch unprecedented authority over the distribution of billions in research funding. This development, detailed in a recent Forbes analysis, raises profound questions about the independence of science in the United States and the potential politicization of fields ranging from climate change to public health.

At its core, the executive order empowers the White House to directly influence the priorities of agencies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the Department of Energy (DOE). Previously, these organizations operated with a degree of autonomy, relying on peer-reviewed processes to award grants based on scientific merit. Now, under the new directive, all major grant proposals must undergo an additional layer of review by a newly established Office of Science Policy Coordination, housed within the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). This office, led by appointees loyal to the president, will have veto power over funding decisions that do not align with administration-defined "national priorities."

Critics argue this could stifle innovation and suppress research that challenges the administration's agenda. For instance, environmental scientists fear that studies on climate change, which Trump has repeatedly dismissed as a "hoax," might face defunding or heavy scrutiny. Public health experts are concerned about grants related to vaccine development or pandemic preparedness, especially given the administration's past handling of COVID-19. One anonymous researcher quoted in the article likened the order to "putting a political filter on the lens of discovery," suggesting it could deter top talent from pursuing federal funding altogether.

Supporters of the order, including some conservative policymakers, frame it as a necessary step to ensure taxpayer dollars are spent efficiently and in line with American interests. They point to instances where federal grants have funded what they deem "frivolous" or ideologically driven projects, such as certain social science studies on gender and inequality. The order includes provisions for prioritizing research in areas like artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and energy independence—fields that align with Trump's "America First" doctrine. Proponents claim this will accelerate breakthroughs in strategically important sectors, potentially boosting economic growth and national security.

The executive order builds on previous actions by the Trump administration to centralize control over science policy. During his first term, Trump restructured the OSTP and reduced funding for certain environmental programs. This latest move expands on that foundation, mandating that all grant recipients submit annual reports on how their work advances "economic prosperity and public welfare," as defined by the administration. Failure to comply could result in funding cuts or clawbacks, a mechanism that has alarmed university administrators and research institutions reliant on federal support.

The scientific community's response has been swift and vocal. Organizations like the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) have issued statements condemning the order as an assault on academic freedom. In a letter to Congress, AAAS leaders warned that politicizing grants could lead to a "brain drain," with researchers seeking opportunities abroad in countries like Canada or Germany, where science funding remains more insulated from political whims. Nobel laureates and prominent figures in academia have echoed these concerns, drawing parallels to historical instances where governments manipulated science for ideological ends, such as in the Soviet Union under Lysenkoism.

From a legal standpoint, the order's durability is uncertain. Experts suggest it could face challenges in court, particularly if it infringes on congressional authority over appropriations. The Constitution vests Congress with the power of the purse, but executive orders have historically allowed presidents to influence how funds are spent within broad legislative frameworks. Democrats in Congress have already vowed to introduce legislation to counteract the order, potentially setting the stage for a partisan battle over the future of American science.

Economically, the implications are vast. Federal science grants total over $150 billion annually, supporting everything from medical breakthroughs to technological innovations. Disruptions in this funding stream could ripple through industries dependent on research, such as pharmaceuticals and renewable energy. Startups and tech firms that collaborate with federally funded labs might reconsider partnerships, fearing instability. Moreover, the order could exacerbate existing disparities in research funding, favoring institutions in politically aligned states while marginalizing others.

Internationally, the move has drawn scrutiny from global partners. Allies in Europe and Asia, who often collaborate on joint research initiatives, worry that U.S. politicization could undermine multinational projects like those under the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) or the World Health Organization (WHO). Trump's administration has a track record of withdrawing from such bodies, and this order might further isolate American science on the world stage.

Looking ahead, the executive order represents a pivotal shift in the balance between politics and science. While it promises to align research with national goals, it risks eroding the foundational principle that science should be driven by evidence, not ideology. As debates intensify, the coming months will likely see congressional hearings, legal challenges, and public campaigns from scientists advocating for the restoration of independent funding mechanisms. For now, the order stands as a bold assertion of executive power, one that could redefine the landscape of scientific inquiry in the United States for years to come.

This development underscores a broader trend in the Trump era: the intersection of policy and science in an increasingly polarized environment. Whether this leads to greater efficiency or unintended setbacks remains to be seen, but the stakes—for innovation, public health, and global competitiveness—are undeniably high. As one expert noted, "Science thrives on curiosity and objectivity; imposing political oversight is like trying to steer a ship with a blindfold." The full ramifications of this executive order will unfold as researchers, policymakers, and the public grapple with its consequences.

Read the Full Forbes Article at:
[ https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2025/08/09/new-executive-order-gives-trump-greater-control-over-science-grants/ ]

N※N

New Executive Order Gives Trump Greater Control Over Science Grants

Trump's New Executive Order: Tightening Grip on Federal Science Funding