Docket number: 1:25-cv-4452 (S.D.N.Y.)
On April 18, 2025, the National Science Foundation issued a Policy Directive that reorientated its research funding decisions to the original mission of pursuing scientific research that focuses on intellectual merit that has a broad impact on the country, rather than favor certain narrow classes. The National Science Foundation terminated certain projects that do not align with that mission. The National Science Foundation also implemented a cap of 15 percent for indirect costs for new funding awards. Following these announcements, sixteen states filed this lawsuit against the National Science Foundation and its acting director. Plaintiffs allege that the revised Policy Directive violated the Administrative Procedures Act, violates Separation of Powers under the U.S. Constitution, and is ultra vires because the National Science Foundation exceeded its congressionally granted authority. The thrust of Plaintiffs’ complaint is that Congress mandated “NSF to undertake activities for the specific purpose of increasing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (“STEM”) participation by women, minorities, and people with disabilities.” Plaintiffs’ complaint seeks to resurrect research funding based on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (“DEI”) principles and prevent implementation of the National Science Foundation’s updated guidance on scientific research priorities.
Represented by HLLI, the National Association of Scholars moved to intervene in the case on June 20, 2025. NAS is a tax-exempt non-profit organization that seeks to uphold the traditional standards of higher education by prioritizing merit and achievement, fostering intellectual freedom, searching for the truth, and promoting virtuous citizenship. NAS adamantly opposes the pernicious intrusion of DEI ideology within academia, particularly in the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics disciplines.
NAS sought to protect it and its members in ensuring that federal research grants funded by the National Science Foundation are evaluated and awarded based on scientific merit, with equal opportunity for all, and not based on racial or gender preferences as advocated by the Plaintiffs.
Although the court denied NAS’s motion to intervene, it granted NAS leave to file a brief as amicus curiae. On July 7, NAS filed a brief of amicus curiae opposing Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs sought to enjoin the Priority Directive and reinstate the terminated grants. NAS argued that Plaintiffs were not entitled to a preliminary injunction because Plaintiffs could not demonstrate they are likely to succeed on the merits, that the balance of equities tipped in their favor, or that an injunction was in the public interest. Plaintiffs failed on each of these factors because the relief they sought was essentially a demand that NSF act unconstitutionally by violating the Equal Protection guarantees incorporated in the Fifth Amendment by issuing grant funding based on race and sex preferences.
On August 1, 2025, the court denied the Plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction, consistent with HLLI’s amicus brief.
On August 22, 2025, the state plaintiffs gave notice that they were voluntarily dismissing the case.
Case Documents