Key Takeaways:
- NIH is funding over $1.3 billion in grants with DEI components, even after Trump’s executive order to end such programs.
- Some grants focus on anti-racist training, race-based hiring, and diversity-first faculty pipelines.
- These programs remain funded due to multi-year grant cycles and legal hurdles in terminating contracts.
- Critics argue DEI initiatives may violate federal anti-discrimination laws and shift focus from merit-based science.
NIH Defies Trump’s Order, Keeps Funding DEI Programs
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is still funding more than $1.3 billion in grants that include diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) components, despite President Donald Trump’s executive order to eliminate such programs. While other federal agencies like USAID have canceled similar initiatives, NIH continues to support DEI-related projects, raising concerns about how taxpayer dollars are being used.
Multi-Million Dollar Grants for DEI Initiatives
Some of the active grants include:
- $28 million to Mount Sinai to embed “anti-racist” and “justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion” (JEDI) principles into its medical research infrastructure until 2028.
- $10 million to the University of Michigan to expand diversity in research and train diverse clinicians across the state until 2027.
- $40 million for an AI initiative aimed at addressing “sex-related disparities in research” and increasing women’s representation in machine learning and genomics through 2029.
These grants highlight NIH’s ongoing commitment to DEI, even under the Trump administration.
Why NIH Can’t Easily Cut DEI Funding
NIH’s funding structure makes it challenging to terminate DEI-related grants. Most grants operate on multi-year cycles, with funds distributed annually. Once approved, these grants become legally binding contracts between the government and recipient institutions.
Dr. Kurt Miceli, medical director of watchdog group Do No Harm, explained that terminating these grants requires formal justification, such as a violation of terms or voluntary relinquishment by the recipient. This process is rare and administratively complex.
During the Biden administration, researchers often added DEI language to existing grants during annual renewals. These changes allowed ideological priorities to blend with scientific goals, creating a gray area where politics influenced funding without explicitly changing the project’s purpose.
Miceli said some grants were originally focused on scientific aims like genomics, cancer research, or antibacterial studies but later incorporated DEI language to align with Biden-era priorities.
Legal and Ethical Concerns
Critics argue that NIH’s DEI programs may violate federal anti-discrimination laws, such as Title VI and Title VII, which prohibit race or sex-based discrimination in hiring, admissions, and promotions.
For example, the University of Michigan grant funds a diversity officer to build a faculty pipeline tied to DEI goals. Miceli believes these initiatives distort institutional priorities and shift funding toward identity-based criteria rather than merit.
“Federal law prohibits using race in decisions,” Miceli said. “When programs focus on diversity to push DEI ideology, it becomes harmful and harder to reverse.”
Other Agencies Act While NIH Lags
While NIH continues to fund DEI programs, other agencies have moved swiftly to comply with Trump’s executive order. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that 83% of USAID’s programs were canceled, including ideological nonprofits and gender identity initiatives.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), NIH’s parent agency, has also taken steps to eliminate left-wing ideology from federal programs. However, NIH operates semi-autonomously, and there’s no sign of a department-wide audit, revised funding criteria, or updated peer review standards.
A Path Forward?
Miceli remains hopeful for reforms, especially with Dr. Bhattacharya, Trump’s nominee for NIH director, potentially leading the agency. He believes future grants will prioritize science over ideology.
Until then, many DEI programs remain funded, channeling taxpayer dollars into initiatives that critics argue violate federal law and undermine merit-based science.
Neither the White House nor NIH responded to requests for comment on the issue.
The NIH’s continued support for DEI programs has sparked a heated debate about the role of ideology in science, the use of taxpayer funds, and compliance with federal anti-discrimination laws. As the agency’s DEI-heavy portfolio remains intact, critics are calling for transparency, accountability, and a return to merit-based research.