The Trump administration is still prohibiting National Institutes of Health (NIH) staff from issuing virtually all grant funding, an NIH official tells Popular Information. The ongoing funding freeze is also reflected in internal correspondence reviewed by Popular Information and was reiterated to staff in a meeting on Monday. The funding freeze at NIH violates two federal court injunctions, two legal experts said.

The funding freeze at NIH puts all of the research the agency funds at risk. As the primary funder of biomedical research in the United States, NIH-funded research includes everything from cancer treatments to heart disease prevention to stroke interventions.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1120 hours ago

    Only applies to the presidency and only if the courts remain a legitimate institution in the US, a fact that is increasingly in question.

    But also, his goons are completely vulnerable either way and there is little the president can do with his own hands.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      919 hours ago

      But also, his goons are completely vulnerable either way and there is little the president can do with his own hands.

      They all hope for/assume/were promised full pardons.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1018 hours ago

        Pardons would only help with criminal contempt charges. In this case, the judge would probably be applying civil contempt to compel compliance with the court order. Since they wouldn’t be held on a criminal charge, pardoning the crime wouldn’t get them released.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        219 hours ago

        True but it at least requires them to go through that process and can still inconvenience and intimidate people. Trump is capricious and unpredictable and there may be uncertainty as to whether such pardons will be granted, and even if they are, people could be arrested in the meantime.

        If there is a way to nail them with state charges then this would get around this although I would assume most of these activities primarily violate federal law and take place in the District which does not have the independence of a state, unfortunately.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          217 hours ago

          I believe there can’t be state charges in this because that would imply a state court ordering a federal agency to do something which i believe is more or less impossible due to the Supremacy Clause.

          But the capricious nature of Deputy Assistant President Trump is a real danger to these people, especially if whatever illegal thing they’re doing for him gets big bad publicity and could make him unpopular.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            217 hours ago

            Federal officials can still be subject to state charges if they break state law. It’s not a matter of ordering a federal agency to do anything, so the supremacy clause should not be relevant here. The question is what state laws could they be breaking? There may not be any.