DOE Exposes Partisan Retaliation: 284 Research Grants Terminated in Trump-Supporting States
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
Court documents reveal the Department of Energy axed 284 federal research grants in states that backed President Trump in 2024, a move the agency claims was not based on programmatic criteria, raising concerns about the politicization of science funding.
In a disturbing admission, the Department of Energy (DOE) acknowledged in a recent court filing that it cancelled 284 federal research grants after an Office of Management and Budget review targeted projects in states that supported President Donald Trump in the 2024 election and had two Republican-caucusing senators. This blatant targeting of research institutions based on political geography underscores the deepening politicization of federal funding under right-wing leadership.
Jeff Novak, the DOE’s principal deputy general counsel, attempted to deflect criticism by insisting the decision was not based on programmatic, statutory, cost-reduction, or performance-based factors. Yet, the agency’s own filing admits the only commonality was the political alignment of the states, raising serious questions about the integrity of the process and the future of scientific independence.
The lawsuit, brought by University of California researchers, challenges the DOE’s actions and highlights the chilling effect such partisan maneuvers have on academic freedom and innovation. DOE press secretary Ben Dietderich and Energy Secretary Chris Wright both denied political motivations, but their statements ring hollow in light of the facts presented in court.
These 284 cancelled grants are part of a broader pattern, with over 2,300 DOE financial assistance awards under review and 624 marked for termination or cancellation. The fact that 340 proposed terminations were not carried out only adds to the arbitrariness of the process.
Alarmingly, the Office of Management and Budget is now proposing a rule to give political appointees even greater authority to review and terminate federal grants, a move that would further erode the separation between science and partisan politics, and threaten the nation’s research infrastructure.