GW joined a lawsuit filed Monday against the National Institutes of Health, arguing its decision to slash congressionally approved grant funding for universities is “flagrantly unlawful” and will cripple medical research.
The lawsuit, led by the Association of American Universities, the American Council on Education and the Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities, follows the NIH’s decision Friday to instate a 15 percent cap on “indirect funding” covered by grants, which usually consists of overhead and administrative costs incurred by universities during the research process. GW and 15 other plaintiffs filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts on Monday against the NIH and the Department of Health and Human Services.
The University of Pennsylvania, Brown, Johns Hopkins, Cornell and Brandeis universities, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the entire University of California system are among the 16 plaintiffs. GW joined the AAU, an association of 71 leading research universities, in 2023.
“Cutting-edge work to cure disease and lengthen life spans will suffer, and our country will lose its status as the destination for solving the world’s biggest health problems,” the lawsuit states. “At stake is not only Americans’ quality of life, but also our Nation’s enviable status as a global leader in scientific research and innovation.”
The NIH, which reported spending $35 billion on grants to universities, medical schools and other research institutions in fiscal year 2023, said Friday it would cap coverage for universities’ overhead and administrative costs at 15 percent — down from an average of roughly 30 percent — to save an estimated $4 billion annually. At GW, indirect cost funding supports lab space, utilities, libraries and department and central administration staff.
A federal judge late Monday temporarily blocked the cuts, which President Donald Trump’s administration planned to implement that day. The judge’s temporary restraining order came after 22 state attorneys general and a coalition of health organizations led by the Association of American Medical Colleges also filed suits challenging the action.
In the complaint filed Monday, GW and 15 other plaintiffs contend that the NIH’s decision violates the separation of powers by allowing the executive branch to exercise Congress’ control over the allocation of funding to federal agencies. The plaintiffs further assert that the indirect costs are critical for sustaining universities’ research infrastructure.
The order from the NIH follows a slew of executive actions from Trump’s administration attacking higher education and research, including funding freezes for more than 2,000 federal programs — an order the White House rescinded the same week.
In an email to community members Tuesday, University President Ellen Granberg, Provost Chris Bracey, General Counsel Charles Barber and Interim Vice Provost for Research Robert Miller announced GW’s participation in the lawsuit and asserted that the NIH’s decision would slow or stop progress on research for life-threatening diseases and public health. The funding cuts would strip students of “valuable learning opportunities” and stifle innovation and economic growth, the email states.
“GW opposes the proposed action on the grounds that it is arbitrary and capricious and a violation of federal statute and regulations, in addition to its likely devastating effects on life-saving research,” Tuesday’s email states.
Officials in the email directed concerned faculty and researchers to the University’s newly launched Federal Transition Updates page, which compiles a list of recent executive actions that may impact higher education and research. The page lists eight executive actions and five federal agency announcements, including the Trump administration’s decision to end diversity, equity and inclusion programs.
The AAU in a statement Monday said the NIH’s decision to cap indirect funding would have an “immediate and dire” impact on medical research at universities nationwide and “runs afoul” of federal regulatory procedures governing federal grants.
“Besides harming the ability of research universities to continue doing critical NIH research that seeks out new and more effective approaches to treating cancer, heart disease, and dementia, among others, and translating basic science into cures, this cut would also undermine universities’ essential training of the next generation of biomedical and health science researchers,” AAU’s statement reads.
GW sent a separate email to community members Monday, acknowledging the “far-reaching” impacts the NIH’s decision could have on the University’s research funding. The email states that indirect costs support laboratory equipment and are “necessary” for the continuation of clinical trials, adding that the funding cuts will delay breakthroughs in research for diseases like cancer and HIV at universities across the country.
“This is of most serious concern to us, as it has the potential to dramatically impact academic research here at GW and at universities and medical centers nationwide,” the email states.
