Stanford assists in filing lawsuit against National Institute of Health

Stanford assisted peer universities in filing a lawsuit against the National Institute of Health (NIH) to halt the federal funding cut for “indirect costs” of research announced last week.

Also referred to as “facilities and administrative costs,” indirect costs are expenses that support research projects like construction and upkeep of laboratories; purchase of tools, electricity and internet connection for researchers; funding for maintenance and janitorial staff; and more. The NIH announced last week that all future grants will have a 15% cap on funding for indirect cost, down from a 26% department average according to the NIH memo. Stanford currently has a 54.4% indirect cost rate with the NIH. 

Stanford was not listed as a plaintiff in the suit, which named academic contemporaries like Harvard, the University of California (UC) Board of Regents and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) among others. 

Despite not suing the NIH directly, Stanford is “working intensely with research universities across the country to make clear the vital role of federal funding in generating transformative scientific advances and maintaining U.S. leadership in innovation,” said University president Jonathan Levin ’94 to the Stanford Report.

The lawsuit, which called the actions of the NIH “flagrantly unlawful,” alleged that the announcement was an “affront to the separation of powers” and violated the Administrative Procedures Act, a federal law that governs agency regulations. The plaintiffs requested that the court grant a declaratory judgement finding the announcement “procedurally invalid, arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law” and summarily prohibit the NIH from modifying indirect cost rates already negotiated with the universities named. 

Also on Monday, Judge Angel Kelley granted a temporary restraining order blocking the NIH funding change in response to a separate lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts earlier that day. 

Attorney generals from 22 states, including California, filed an emergency motion against the NIH, claiming that the funding change “will devastate critical public health research at universities and research institutions” within their respective states. 

The attorney generals’ lawsuit declared that “halting research to cure and treat human disease will directly impact the well-being of the Plaintiff states’ citizens.” The suit cited modern gene editing, flu vaccines, and cures for diseases like cancer and addiction as examples of treatments available to citizens as a result of federally-funded research.

The NIH must respond to the temporary restraining order by Friday, Feb. 14. Both the NIH and the states are expected to appear in court on Friday, Feb. 21. 

In a press release, California Attorney General Rob Bonta said his department will be closely monitoring the NIH and the current administration to ensure they are following the temporary restraining order. California is home to many of the universities that would have been most affected by this order, including the UC system, which received over $2 billion dollars from the NIH in 2023, and the California State University (CSU) system, which received $158 million from the NIH last year. 

“Ours is a state known as a national and global leader in life-saving biomedical research,” said Bonta. “I will not allow the Trump Administration to jeopardize the extraordinary work being done right now by scientists, scholars, medical professionals and other workers.”

The post Stanford assists in filing lawsuit against National Institute of Health appeared first on The Stanford Daily.