The Trump administration has hindered a key part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding process for medical research, potentially breaching a federal judge’s temporary restraining order that prohibits freezes on federal funding.

Following the Trump administration’s suspension of communication from health agencies, the NIH has ceased submitting information about study sections—important meetings where scientists evaluate NIH grant proposals—to the Federal Register. According to federal law, notifications of study sections are required to be published at least 15 days prior to their meetings.

Jeremy Berg, a biochemist and former overseer of NIH funding, stated, “The principle is that the public should be informed about who is counseling the federal government and when these meetings are taking place.”

These study sections are essential for scientists working across the nation on research related to various aspects of medicine and disease, which includes vital areas like drug development, cancer, heart conditions, and aging research.

An internal email obtained by the Guardian revealed that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has directed the NIH to postpone Federal Register submissions indefinitely.

Biologist Carole LaBonne, who leads a stem cell research lab at Northwestern University and has served on study sections, remarked that this move effectively “puts the brakes on the extramural research program.”

Samuel Bagenstos, a law professor at the University of Michigan and former HHS general counsel until December 2024, asserted that this behavior is a clear breach of federal judicial orders.

Bagenstos shared that Judge John McConnell “originally issued a temporary restraining order instructing the administration to halt the funding freeze,” and when further evidence indicated that the Trump administration was attempting to sidestep that order, he expanded his directive, mandating that the administration immediately cease any funding pause and eliminate any obstacles hindering the implementation of this order.

Bagenstos added, “This notion that funding will only be distributed post-study sections—and oops, we can’t hold the study sections because we are preventing their notices from being filed—clearly disregards the judge’s directive.”

Should the Trump administration persist in evading court directives, Bagenstos highlighted that judges have several options, including issuing more precise orders to individuals responsible for such violations or even holding them in civil contempt, which could result in jail time—actions that cannot be undone by a presidential pardon.

Study sections involve groups of scientists from various institutions convening to review grant applications, as Berg explained. Each session typically includes 20 or more peer reviewers evaluating up to 100 proposals.

According to Berg, “It’s approximately two weeks of work” for each reviewer.

An insider familiar with the NIH process estimated that for every three days of delayed study sessions, $1 billion in NIH funding is delayed. Despite the requirement for study section notices to appear in the Federal Register 15 days before meetings, appointments set for February 20 were postponed just a day prior.

One scientist slated to present her grant proposal remarked, “This week, just as we were checking in for our flights to D.C., my study section was inexplicably canceled.” Following this, she and her colleagues deduced that the issue stemmed from a problem with the Federal Register, an often-overlooked aspect of the funding process.

Two reviewers affected by the February 20 cancellations admitted they were unaware of the notice requirement until this week. One speculated that this maneuver represents “another clever tactic against medical research,” considering that few, even within the NIH, fully grasp the complexities of the process. It’s an “administrative hurdle that someone like me would likely never interact with or be aware of,” he noted.

Scientists interviewed by the Guardian expressed confusion over the last-minute cancellations of study sections, especially since they should have been announced 15 days prior. LaBonne suspects NIH staff are clinging to the hope that meetings might somehow proceed.

“They’re trying to keep this possibility alive until the very last moment, hoping for some leniency that would allow the study sections to continue, perhaps even waiving the 15-day notice requirement,” LaBonne elaborated.

Stuart Buck, a Harvard Law alum and executive director of the Good Science Project, remarked that these developments make it “extremely challenging to predict what might happen next.”

Buck pointed out that Jay Bhattacharya, Trump’s nominee to lead the NIH, has “not yet undergone a confirmation hearing.” He questioned, “Why implement such drastic policies without involving the experts intended to operate the agency?”

Buck continued, “Although public discourse centers around cutting the deficit and reducing regulations, the current actions seem primarily focused on disbanding contracts that are insignificant in context of the deficit while terminating staff and creating widespread disruption.”

Another reviewer, anticipating participation in a postponed study section, expressed his bewilderment regarding the situation. He noted that if the meetings are eventually rescheduled, reviewers may either forget details of the proposals they evaluated or have to spend additional time reviewing them, detracting from their own research endeavors.

“This entire scenario is utterly perplexing. They aren’t even cutting costs through these actions. Ultimately, what they are doing will result in greater expenses, simply by delaying progress and complicating researchers’ lives,” he remarked.

A separate reviewer characterized the wasted time as “frustrating,” but emphasized that “the truly alarming aspect is that there’s a lot of essential science tied to those grants that urgently needs funding. If it isn’t provided, research facilities will face closures.”

The NIH press office declined to comment for inclusion in this report.