Fact Check: A judge appointed by Ronald Reagan ruled that President Trump's cuts to diversity, equity, and inclusion-related research grants at the National Institutes of Health were illegal and discriminatory.

Fact Check: "A judge appointed by Ronald Reagan ruled that President Trump's cuts to diversity, equity, and inclusion-related research grants at the National Institutes of Health were illegal and discriminatory."

What We Know

On June 16, 2025, U.S. District Judge William Young, appointed by President Ronald Reagan, ruled that the Trump administration's termination of several hundred research grants by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) was illegal and discriminatory. The judge expressed that the cuts raised serious concerns about racial discrimination and discrimination against the LGBTQ community, stating, "I’ve never seen government racial discrimination like this" (AP News). The grants in question were primarily associated with research on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), as well as studies focusing on health disparities among different racial and gender groups (Washington Post).

Judge Young criticized the administration's process for being "arbitrary and capricious," indicating that it did not adhere to established government standards when canceling the grants (Science). The ruling came as part of two lawsuits filed by a coalition of states and advocacy groups, which argued that the cuts were ideologically motivated rather than based on scientific merit (Nature).

Analysis

The ruling by Judge Young is significant as it directly challenges the rationale behind the Trump administration's funding cuts. The judge's comments during the proceedings highlighted his belief that the cancellations were not only unlawful but also indicative of broader discriminatory practices. He stated, "You’re bearing down on people of color because of their color," which underscores the serious implications of the cuts (Guardian).

The judge's ruling is supported by a range of plaintiffs, including public health organizations and state attorneys general, who argue that the cuts undermine critical research necessary for understanding health disparities (Politico). The administration's defense, which claimed that the NIH had the discretion to prioritize grants based on scientific value, was met with skepticism from the judge, who demanded a clearer definition of DEI and questioned the legitimacy of the reasons given for the grant terminations (Yahoo News).

In evaluating the sources, the Associated Press and Washington Post are reputable news organizations known for their journalistic integrity. The coverage from these outlets provides a comprehensive overview of the ruling and its implications, while also including statements from both the plaintiffs and the government. The analysis from scientific and advocacy groups further contextualizes the importance of the research affected by the cuts, reinforcing the claim's validity.

Conclusion

The claim that a judge appointed by Ronald Reagan ruled that President Trump's cuts to diversity, equity, and inclusion-related research grants at the NIH were illegal and discriminatory is True. The ruling by Judge William Young explicitly stated that the terminations were unlawful and raised serious concerns about racial and LGBTQ discrimination, reflecting a significant judicial rebuke of the Trump administration's policies regarding NIH funding.

Sources

1. Judge rules some NIH grant cuts illegal, saying he's never seen such discrimination in 40 years
2. Judge orders NIH to restore research grants related to diversity
3. Judge orders NIH to restore hundreds of grants cut under Trump
4. Judge rules against NIH grant cuts — and calls them discriminatory
5. Trump officials cutting $1bn in NIH grants is 'void and illegal', judge rules
6. 'My duty is to call it out': Judge accuses Trump administration of discrimination
7. Trump NIH Cuts Represent “Racial Discrimination”
8. US judge declares Trump's cuts to NIH grants 'illegal'