A federal judge in Massachusetts recently ruled that directives from the Trump administration leading to the termination of several research grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) were deemed 'void' and 'illegal'.

U.S. District Judge William Young stated that the cancellation of these grants, which were related to LGBTQ+ issues, gender identity, and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) studies, violated federal law. The judge described it as a case of racial discrimination and discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community, as per the plaintiffs in the case.

Two lawsuits were filed against the administration, one by the American Public Health Association and another by a group of 16 states. It has been estimated that up to $1.8 billion in research funding was cut as a result.

Young, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan, has ordered the NIH to reinstate the terminated grants.

Andrew Nixon, the director of communications for the Department of Health and Human Services, defended the decision to end funding for research that prioritized ideological agendas over scientific rigor. He stated that HHS is exploring legal options, including filing an appeal and moving to stay the order.

Dr. Brittany Charlton, an associate professor at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, was among the plaintiffs who had all her grants terminated by the NIH. One of the grants focused on documenting obstetrical outcomes for lesbian, gay, and bisexual women, while another looked at how discriminatory laws impact mental health among LGBTQ+ teens.

Charlton expressed relief and hope after the judge's ruling, feeling that justice was finally being served and the value of their research was being affirmed.

The cancellations came after President Donald Trump issued executive orders targeting DEI initiatives and vowing to 'defend women from gender ideology extremism.'

Termination letters sent to researchers cited that the canceled projects did not align with the priorities of the current administration, deeming them unscientific and lacking return on investment.