The document pertains to a civil case before the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, in which several public health organizations and individuals challenge decisions by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), along with their respective leadership. The dispute centers on the abrupt termination and slowdown of a range of NIH-funded grants, purportedly due to shifts in agency priorities, which the plaintiffs argue are unlawful and damaging to the biomedical research ecosystem.
A group of major academic and higher education associations—including the Association of American Medical Colleges, the American Council on Education, and others—have sought leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. In their brief, the proposed amici emphasize their substantial stake in the outcome, citing their members’ predominant role in conducting NIH-sponsored research. The brief contends that NIH’s actions undermine the statutory and regulatory frameworks designed to ensure research funding is stable, predictable, and guided by transparent, multi-year strategic plans approved by Congress. The amici argue the terminations lack proper legal foundation, exceed NIH’s authority, and are arbitrary and capricious under administrative law, as they disregard longstanding reliance interests of institutions, researchers, and trial participants. The brief further asserts that NIH failed to provide adequate explanation or consideration of alternatives, breaching administrative procedure requirements and jeopardizing the integrity and sustainability of the nation’s biomedical research enterprise. Thus, they urge the court to grant the requested preliminary injunction to reinstate and protect ongoing research projects.
