A federal judge Monday ordered the Trump administration to restore $500 million in UCLA medical research grants, halting for now a nearly two-month funding crisis that UC leaders said threatened the future of the nation’s premier public university system.
The opinion by U.S. District Judge Rita F. Lin of the Northern District of California added hundreds of UCLA’s National Institutes of Health grants to an ongoing class-action lawsuit that had already led to the reversal of tens of millions of dollars in grants from the National Science Foundation, Environmental Protection Agency, National Endowment for the Humanities and other federal agencies to UC campuses.
Lin’s order provides the biggest relief to UCLA but affects federal funding awarded to all 10 University of California campuses. Lin ruled that the NIH grants were suspended by form letters that were unspecific to the research, a likely violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, which regulates executive branch rulemaking.
In addition to the medical grant freezes — which had prompted talks of possible UCLA layoffs or closures of labs conducting cancer and stroke research, among other studies — Lin said the government would have to restore a smaller amount of Department of Defense and Department of Transportation grants to UC schools.
Lin elaborated on her thinking in a hearing Thursday, saying that the Trump administration had undertaken a “fundamental sin” in its “un-reasoned mass terminations” of the grants using “letters that don’t go through the required factors that the agency is supposed to consider.”
The preliminary injunction would be in place as the case proceeds through the courts. But in broadening the case, Lin agreed with plaintiffs that there would be irreparable harm if the suspensions were not immediately reversed.
The judge, a Biden appointee, told Department of Justice lawyers to make a court filing by Sept. 29 explaining “all steps” the government has take to comply with her order or, if necessary, explain why restoring grants “was not feasible.”
Spokespeople for the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the NIH, and the Department of Justice did not respond to questions from The Times about the government’s next steps after Monday’s ruling. The Trump administration had appealed an earlier ruling in the case to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Last month, the appeals court declined to reverse that ruling by Lin.
Read more: UC Berkeley law professors take on a case for colleagues: Fighting Trump research cuts
The suit was originally filed in June by UC San Francisco and UC Berkeley professors fighting a separate, earlier round of Trump administration grant clawbacks. Additional UCLA faculty later joined the case. The University of California is not a party in the suit.
“This is wonderful news for UC researchers and should be tremendously consequential in ongoing UC negotiations with the Trump administration,” said Claudia Polsky, a UC Berkeley law professor who is part of the legal team behind the suit. “The restoration of more than half a billion dollars to UCLA in NIH funding alone gives UC the strongest hand it has had yet in resisting unlawful federal demands.”
In court filings and last week’s hearing, Trump administration lawyers argued against lifting more grant freezes, saying the case was in the wrong jurisdiction.
A Justice Department lawyer, Jason Altabet, said during the hearing that instead of a District Court lawsuit filed by professors, the proper venue would be the U.S. Court of Federal Claims for a lawsuit filed by UC. Altabet based his arguments on a recent Supreme Court ruling that upheld the government’s suspension of $783 million in NIH grants — to universities and research centers throughout the country — in part because the issue, the high court said, was not correctly within the jurisdiction of a lower federal court.
Altabet said the administration was “fully embracing the principles in the Supreme Court’s recent opinions.”
Prior court orders in the case and others nationally have resulted in government notices to campuses within days saying that funding will flow again.
The Trump administration rescinded $584 million in UCLA grants in late July, citing allegations of campus antisemitism, use of race in admissions and the school’s recognition of transgender identities as its reasons. The awards included $81 million from the National Science Foundation — also restored last month by Lin — and $3 million from the Department of Energy, which is still suspended.
Read more: ‘A continual assault.’ How UCLA’s research faculty is grappling with Trump funding freeze
Last month, the government proposed a roughly $1.2-billion fine and demanded wide campus changes over admissions, protest rules, gender-affirming healthcare for minors and the disclosure of internal campus records, among other demands, in exchange for restoring the money.
UCLA has said it made changes in the last year to improve the climate for Jewish communities and does not use race in admissions. Its chancellor, Julio Frenk, has said that defunding medical research “does nothing” to address discrimination allegations. The university displays websites and policies that recognize different gender identities and maintains services for LGBTQ+ communities.
UC leaders said they will not pay the $1.2-billion fine and are negotiating with the Trump administration over its other demands. They have told The Times that many settlement proposals cross the university’s red lines.
“Recent federal cuts to research funding threaten lifesaving biomedical research, hobble U.S. economic competitiveness and jeopardize the health of Americans who depend on cutting-edge medical science and innovation,” a UC spokesperson said in a statement Thursday after Lin held the most recent hearing. “While the University of California is not a party to this suit, the UC system is engaged in numerous legal and advocacy efforts to restore funding to vital research programs across the humanities, social sciences and STEM fields.”
Read more: Here are the details of Trump’s $1.2-billion call to remake UCLA in a conservative image
The case had been closely watched by researchers at the Westwood campus, who have cut back on lab hours, reduced operations and considered layoffs as the crisis at UCLA moves toward the two-month mark.
Neil Garg, a professor of chemistry and biochemistry at UCLA whose roughly four-year $2.9-million grant was suspended over the summer, said that “people on the campus will be overjoyed” by the injunction.
“From the scientific side of it, it is incredibly warming to hear that, to see that sort of decision,” Garg said. “But we will wait and see how things play out.”
Garg’s 19-person lab works on developing new organic chemistry reactions that could have pharmaceutical applications. “We try to invent chemistry that is unknown,” he explained.
No one in Garg’s lab lost his or her job after his grant was suspended. Since the suspension, Garg had been applying for new sources of funding. “I have been very aggressive, as have many of my colleagues, in applying for more funding,” he said. “Even if the funds are restored, we don’t know how quickly that will happen or how permanent that is.”
Staff writer Daniel Miller contributed to this report.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
