Federal judge issues nationwide injunction against NIH’s drastic funding cuts to universities – The Times of India

A federal judge in Massachusetts has issued a nationwide temporary injunction halting the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from imposing significant cuts to its research funding, potentially safeguarding billions of dollars designated for universities and research institutions across the US. The ruling, handed down on March 5, 2025, follows a legal battle brought by a coalition of state attorneys general, medical associations, and research universities who argued that the NIH’s decision would cause irreparable harm to ongoing research and clinical trials.
The NIH’s plan aimed to cap reimbursement for indirect costs related to university research at 15%, nearly half of the 28% average rate that has been in place in recent years. The cap would have resulted in drastic reductions in funding, with experts warning that it could endanger important medical research, including drug and vaccine development, and disrupt critical clinical trials.
A victory for research institutions
Judge Angel Kelley, a Federal District Court judge for the District of Massachusetts, issued the injunction after hearing arguments from the plaintiffs, who claimed the NIH’s move would severely harm their institutions. As reported by Forbes, the judge emphasized that the plaintiffs had demonstrated the likelihood of suffering “irreparable harms,” including the suspension of ongoing clinical trials and the potential loss of essential research subjects. She wrote in her 76-page decision that “the suspension of ongoing clinical trials and the resulting threats to patients’ lives represents a dire risk of a quintessentially irreparable nature.”
The decision extends the hold on the NIH’s proposed changes, which were first blocked on February 10, 2025, and will remain in effect until the case progresses through the courts. The ruling signals that the plaintiffs may ultimately prevail, providing a sense of relief to universities that depend heavily on NIH grants for their research operations.
The scale of the cuts and their impact
The NIH is the largest federal agency providing grants for biomedical research, with its budget totaling $48 billion in fiscal year 2024. Of this, approximately 83% is allocated to extramural research, which includes grants to universities, medical schools, and research institutions. For FY 2024, the NIH awarded over $26 billion in grants, of which $7 billion was designated for indirect costs, such as facilities maintenance, staff salaries, and equipment upgrades.
The plaintiffs argued that reducing reimbursement for these indirect costs would undermine the capacity of universities to conduct essential research. Many of these institutions rely on the NIH to support everything from disease diagnosis to the development of new medical technologies and treatments. According to Forbes, the plaintiffs warned that the cap could lead to the termination of clinical trials, the deterioration of research facilities, and the loss of key personnel, all of which would be impossible to fully recover from.
Ongoing concerns and challenges
Despite the court’s ruling, concerns over the future direction of the NIH remain. The agency has faced significant turmoil, including staff layoffs and the suspension of some grant-review meetings. As reported by Forbes, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, President Donald Trump’s nominee to head the NIH, has refused to commit to reversing the reimbursement cap, fueling further uncertainty among academic researchers.
While the court’s decision has temporarily alleviated some of the pressure, it remains to be seen how the case will unfold and what long-term implications it may have for the NIH’s funding policies and the broader research community.