4 minutes read time
In a devastating blow to scientific research and public health, the Supreme Court on Thursday gave the Felonious Punk administration a green light to proceed with the cancellation of nearly $800 million in previously approved National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants. This is not a story about fiscal responsibility or streamlining government. It is the story of an ideological purge. The research being defunded is not frivolous; it is life-saving work on breast cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, HIV prevention, suicide, and the health disparities that plague minority, rural, and LGBTQ+ communities. By allowing these cuts to proceed, the Court’s conservative majority has effectively sanctioned a politically motivated assault on science, validating an administration that has declared war on any form of knowledge that does not align with its narrow, right-wing worldview.
The “DEI” Smokescreen
The administration’s justification for this unprecedented disruption of science is a cynical and dishonest smokescreen. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and other officials have labeled these hundreds of research projects as “low-value,” “off-mission,” and part of a crackdown on “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI)” initiatives that they claim promote “insidious racial discrimination.” As you said, Charles, this is an insult. Labeling a study on cardiovascular health in the rural South or the links between traffic pollution and dementia in minority communities as “DEI” is a deliberate act of mischaracterization. It is a political cudgel used to delegitimize and defund any research that acknowledges the reality of systemic inequality in public health. This is not a serious policy position; it is a bad-faith argument designed to provide cover for a targeted attack on research that benefits women, people of color, and the LGBTQ+ community—the very people whose existence and experiences often contradict the administration’s preferred “fairytale” narrative of American life.
A “Breathtakingly Arbitrary” Act of Discrimination
One does not have to be a critic of the administration to see the blatant prejudice at play here. The most scathing condemnation of the NIH cuts came not from a Democratic politician, but from U.S. District Judge William Young, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan. After reviewing the evidence, Judge Young blocked the cuts in June, describing them in a written ruling as “breathtakingly arbitrary and capricious.” In a hearing, his language was even more stark. He stated that it was “palpably clear” that the cuts were animated by racism and homophobia. “I’ve never seen government racial discrimination like this,” Young said, citing his four decades on the bench. “Have we no shame?”
Judge Young found that the administration had engaged in “no reasoned decision-making,” failing to review any data or perform any analysis to substantiate its claims that the studies were unscientific. The cuts were an “ideological purge,” plain and simple, based on a political hit list targeting projects that used “vague, now-forbidden language” related to diversity or “gender ideology.” The NIH, historically a largely apolitical scientific agency, was being weaponized to serve a partisan agenda.
The “Calvinball” Court
The administration, having been rebuked on the merits of the case by the lower courts, turned to the Supreme Court’s emergency docket. In a 5-4 decision, the Court’s conservative majority gave the administration what it wanted, lifting the injunction and allowing the grant cancellations to proceed while the case continues. Their ruling was not based on the substance of the case, but on a procedural argument that the lawsuit should have been filed in a different court. In a fiery dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson perfectly captured the nature of the majority’s reasoning, calling it “Calvinball jurisprudence with a twist.” Referencing the fictional game from the “Calvin and Hobbes” comic strip, she wrote, “Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules. We seem to have two: that one, and this Administration always wins.”
The decision underscores a disturbing pattern of the Court’s conservative wing using the emergency “shadow docket” to usher through the Felonious Punk administration’s agenda, regardless of the rulings of lower courts. In a small silver lining, Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the liberals and Chief Justice John Roberts in a separate 5-4 vote to keep the administration’s anti-DEI guidance blocked for future funding decisions, but the immediate damage is done.
The Incalculable Loss
The true cost of this decision will be measured in human lives. As the plaintiffs argued in their court filings, the abrupt cancellation of these multi-year projects will inflict “incalculable losses in public health and human life.” Decades of data will be ruined, promising avenues of research will be abandoned, and the careers of a diverse generation of scientists will be disrupted. The “DEI” label is a lie. This was never about diversity training; it was about defunding the search for knowledge about diseases that disproportionately affect the vulnerable. It is a deliberate act of sabotage against the nation’s scientific infrastructure and a profound betrayal of the communities whose lives depend on this research, all in the service of a narrow, cruel, and anti-science political agenda.
Discover more from Clight Morning Analysis
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
