Colette Delawalla, founder of the advocacy group Stand Up for Science, said she broke down in tears while reviewing the potential impacts of the proposed rule at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport after returning from a three-day lobbying trip to Capitol Hill. Among the examples she cited was a clinical trial designed to help parents who become suicidal after the death of an infant — a study she said would likely be made illegal under the rule because it involves the kind of international collaboration the rule prohibits.
“I have a two-and-a-half-year-old son at home and thought of what I would do if something happened to him. I just cried,” Delawalla told the Guardian, which first reported on the details of the fight.
The rule, issued by OMB Director Russ Vought, applies to all federal discretionary grants — not only scientific research but also programs covering veterans housing, small business funding, and other categories. The proposal runs 411 pages, according to Delawalla.
“This rule would dismantle the US science ecosystem — but also all federal discretionary grants,” Delawalla said in a phone interview from her home in Decatur, Georgia. “It’s huge.”
Delawalla, 32, founded Stand Up for Science last year to push back against what she described as ideologically driven attacks on research by the Trump administration. Her work recently earned her recognition as one of five “young scientists who are making waves in their own ways” by Scientific American.
Elizabeth Ginexi, who resigned from the NIH last year after 22 years at the agency, told the Guardian that staff cuts by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) had made it impossible for her to do her job. She called the OMB rule “a multi-front assault unprecedented in my lifetime” and said organizations like Stand Up for Science are “filling a gap” left by scientists who typically avoid political engagement.
Ginexi, writing on her Substack, quoted the rule as barring funding for any project that “promote(s) anti-American values” and requiring that discretionary awards “demonstrably advance the president’s policy priorities.”
According to Stand Up for Science, about 10,000 NIH-funded clinical trials were analyzed this week. The group conservatively estimated that nearly half could be discontinued for reasons ranging from use of prohibited words such as “equity” to the inclusion of international collaborations. The discontinued trials could include more than 1,000 cancer-related studies, hundreds of pediatric trials, and hundreds each focused on veterans, suicide, heart disease, and diabetes.
Delawalla said her meetings on Capitol Hill revealed a wide knowledge gap among lawmakers. Only one senator — Maryland Democrat Chris Van Hollen — was familiar with the full detail of the 411-page rule, she said. One veteran House Democrat who she declined to name told her “you’re just protesters” and argued that “the executive branch should have the right to cancel grants.”
Stand Up for Science has urged members of the public to submit comments through the federal government’s regulations page by the July 13 deadline. As of Thursday morning, nearly 31,000 comments had been left at the OMB’s page on the rule, according to the Guardian.
The organization is also pursuing a legal strategy. Delawalla held a virtual meeting last Friday with about 50 attorneys from across the country to discuss possible litigation if the rule is finalized.
“Non-scientists are easier to mobilize,” Delawalla said. “They’ve never been told they need to remain apolitical.” She said the fight is fundamentally about democracy.
“If you tell people in a country they’re not allowed to study certain things with federal money, you’re not in a free country,” she said.