In a surprising twist that's sending ripples through the scientific research community, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Jay Bhattacharya has announced a controversial approach to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) research grants that were previously reinstated through legal action.

Earlier this year, a series of legal battles challenged the Trump administration's initial efforts to halt DEI-related research projects. In June, federal court decisions in Boston led to the restoration of over 2,000 terminated grants, offering hope to researchers who believed their critical work was being unfairly sidelined.

During a recent podcast interview with journalist Paul Thacker, Bhattacharya revealed the agency's new stance. While the grants restored by court order cannot be immediately cut, he made it clear that when these projects come up for renewal over the next year, they will not be continued. 'Look, we are not interested in funding DEI anymore,' Bhattacharya stated, signaling a significant shift in the NIH's research priorities.

The complex legal landscape includes an earlier Supreme Court emergency ruling that deemed the original directives likely illegal, though it did not provide a direct path to reinstatement. Despite this, the NIH did not terminate the awards a second time, and this week reached an agreement with plaintiffs to 'evaluate each application individually and in good faith'.

Recent months have seen increasing political influence in research funding decisions. In August, Bhattacharya published a list of new research priorities, followed by December instructions to NIH program officers to align their grant portfolios with these guidelines. Some researchers have already begun renegotiating projects, often removing language they believe might be flagged by political appointees.

Bhattacharya categorized the affected DEI research projects into three groups: those renegotiated, those terminated and unaffected by court decisions, and those 'forced to be restored' by legal action. For that final group, he was unequivocal: 'They don't meet our priorities and aren't going to get renewed.'

The decision leaves many researchers uncertain about the future of critical work exploring health disparities and diversity in scientific research. While the NIH maintains that each application will be evaluated individually, the broader implications of this policy shift remain to be seen.