More than 1,900 scientists have signed a letter warning that the Trump administration is threatening scientific independence and urging it to “cease its wholesale assault on U.S. science.” Since taking office, President Donald Trump and his team have upended the country’s scientific research apparatus — slashing funding, terminating grants and attempting to weed out ideas deemed unacceptable, according to the letter, which was shared Monday.
“We hold diverse political beliefs, but we are united as researchers in wanting to protect independent scientific inquiry,” the scientists wrote, addressing the American people. “We are sending this SOS to sound a clear warning: the nation’s scientific enterprise is being decimated.”
The signatories — all of whom are elected members of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine — represent some of the nation’s top scientists. Their letter paints a picture of American science in crisis, describing researchers scrubbing papers and grant proposals of scientifically accurate terms that federal agencies have flagged; abandoning studies; and removing their names from work.
“The administration is blocking research on topics it finds objectionable, such as climate change, or that yields results it does not like, on topics ranging from vaccine safety to economic trends,” the scientists wrote, stressing that a “climate of fear has descended on the research community.”
The White House did not immediately respond to request for comment.
The letter comes as Trump’s team overhauls the government, firing thousands of workers in an attempt to dramatically reshape federal institutions. Regardless of the political climate, the government has long been a stable source of funding for scientific research, but even that has not been spared from the Trump administration’s efforts.
Among his first acts in office, Trump demanded that the government halt all spending on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs and ordered that the nation recognize two sexes, male and female, a move criticized by some experts for overlooking biology’s complexities. Many researchers were left reeling, concerned about whether their work would stay funded and free of political interference.
As of March, funding for the National Institutes of Health had dropped by nearly 60 percent, putting a wide array of research in jeopardy, The Washington Post reported. Meanwhile, employees at the National Science Foundation have been combing through research projects looking for keywords — such as “trauma,” “diversity” and even “women” — to determine whether the work violates Trump’s executive orders. Last week, Trump extended his efforts to the Smithsonian, which operates 14 education and research institutions, promising to eliminate what he described as unpatriotic ideas. (A handful of signatories on Monday’s letter are affiliated with the Smithsonian.)
Richard Aslin, one of the letter’s authors and a senior scientist at the Yale School of Medicine, said the scientists want “to make sure the American public is aware that this is not just about us losing our jobs. It’s about the whole country losing a tremendously valuable resource that has made us, honestly, the envy of the world.”
Government funding for science, he said, has remained mostly steady for the past 50 years — providing stability that is crucial, given that discovery and innovation can take years.
Trump’s slashing represents “an unprecedented level of cuts,” Aslin said. “When I talk to my colleagues in Europe, for example, they’re just dumbfounded by it because, of course, the United States is a leader in science.”
Inside science, the anxiety is palpable — some who declined to sign the letter said they worried about opening themselves up to retribution, he noted.
Recent events are “disturbing to many, many scientists because the vast majority of scientists are apolitical,” Aslin said. To have terms like “climate change” characterized as political, he added, leaves researchers on edge, asking: “What’s going to happen next? What’s the next word that’s going to be unacceptable?”
