‘Stand Up for Science’ rallies call for Trump to reverse research cuts

By Richard Sima, Ellie Silverman, Scott Dance and Carolyn Y. Johnson

On any other Friday, Meghan Bullard would probably be immersed in data on a novel treatment for multiple sclerosis, the subject of her dissertation as a graduate student at Georgetown University.

But on this Friday afternoon, she was standing on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial holding up a sign that read “LITERALLY TRYING TO CURE MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS BUT OKAY …” She was one of at least hundreds who gathered there to push back against a series of executive orders, funding freezes and other administrative edicts that they say threaten the foundations of scientific research and could carry deadly and costly long-term consequences.

The demonstration, which also included dozens of satellite rallies and walkouts across the country, marked the first major protest focused on actions by President Donald Trump’s second administration that have cast many scientific and biomedical research efforts into turmoil. Scientists organized the rallies under the banner “Stand Up for Science” with specific demands: an expansion in funding for scientific research and the reinstatement of initiatives on both diversity, equity, and inclusion and accessibility within government-funded science.

• Read More: Harvard warns ‘discovery of new treatments would slow’ under NIH funding cuts

And they’re calling for an end to political interference in science.

Without science, “I wouldn’t be here today,” Emily Whitehead, who was facing a terminal cancer diagnosis until enrolling in an immunotherapy clinical trial at age 6, told the crowd. “I stand up for science so kids can grow up to be the next generation of scientists,” the University of Pennsylvania sophomore said. “I stand up for science because science saved my life.”

Former leaders of government science agencies stressed that the administration’s actions, many of them steered by billionaire technology CEO Elon Musk, threatened to halt dramatic progress in treating diseases and saving the planet from climate change.

“‘Moving fast and breaking things’ might be an appropriate mantra for Silicon Valley,” said Francis S. Collins, a former National Institutes of Health director who less than a week earlier announced his retirement from the research lab he kept at the agency. “Let’s go with, ‘First, do no harm.’”

Science has typically enjoyed bipartisan support in Congress, but public attitudes toward scientists shifted amid the coronavirus pandemic as political debates took hold over lockdowns, the origin of the virus, coronavirus treatments and school closures.

Since Trump reclaimed the presidency in January, executive orders, funding freezes and other administrative edicts have left scientific agencies scrambling to figure out how to comply. Across the country, research institutions that depend on federal funding are tracking the rapidly evolving situation, and some have taken measures such as freezing hiring or capping graduate student admissions for next year.

At the National Science Foundation, staff were tasked with reviewing thousands of existing grants that had been flagged because they contained keywords such as “women” and “diversity.” The National Institutes of Health has been reeling from the loss of longtime leaders and from stops and starts to its massive grant-making operation as it works to stay in compliance with administrative orders and federal courts.

• Read More: Trump’s NIH challenges the model that underlies U.S. scientific dominance

That has required a massive effort to judge if ongoing and proposed scientific activities conflict with executive orders aimed at ending federal support of diversity, equity and inclusion activities. And now NIH has started terminating grants that no longer align with administration priorities, including transgender research and DEI.

At the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Weather Service, there are concerns that the recent firings of hundreds of probationary employees could leave the country and the world more vulnerable to extreme weather and climate change, which Trump has dismissed as a “hoax.” The administration also has taken steps to limit U.S. involvement in the work of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said protesters should be “overjoyed” that Trump’s commitment to redirect “billions of spending” away from diversity-oriented projects would free up more money for “legitimate scientific research, not less.”

“The Trump administration is committed to slashing waste, fraud and abuse while increasing transparency of taxpayer spending and how their money is advancing necessary scientific research and development,” Rogers said in an email.

A group of five young scientists organized Stand Up for Science after connecting on the social media site Bluesky, where each had come in search of support and activism as the new administration policies filled them with dread. After searching the site for protests she could join, lead organizer Colette Delawalla made a bold post of her own that brought the group together: “F--- IT IM PLANNING A STAND UP FOR SCIENCE PROTEST IN DC,” she wrote Feb. 8.

“It just seemed really obvious to me that this is a five-alarm fire,” Delawalla said in an interview. “This is hugely impactful to every American.”

Along with Delawalla, the organizers include J.P. Flores, a doctoral student in bioinformatics at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Emma Courtney, a doctoral candidate in biology at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York; Samantha Goldstein, a doctoral student in health education and behavior at the University of Florida; and Leslie Berntsen, a social scientist with a doctorate in social psychology. Many of the organizers weren’t working in science during the first Trump administration. Some were still in high school.

The event was an echo of larger March for Science events during Trump’s first term, the first of which drew crowds to the National Mall on a rainy Saturday - which also happened to be Earth Day - in 2017. But the Stand Up for Science organizers decided to hold their event on a Friday in part to underscore an important point, writing on the event website: “We believe that our demands are worth stepping away from work to take a stand against the attack on science.”

The planning for Friday’s events began before much of those actions had taken place, allowing the initiative to “snowball” as impacts to research projects continued to pile up, Courtney said.

“It just became more and more dire,” she said. “These are not things that, if we stop for a little while, that we can just rebuild.

Event organizers estimated around 5,000 people would attended the event in D.C., according to a National Park Service permit.

Images shared on social media from other rallies across the country showed large crowds gathered in places including Atlanta, Boston and St. Paul, Minnesota. On Bluesky, scientists shared pictures of walkouts from a lab at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston and from as far away as a hospital in Geneva, Switzerland.

Among other speakers at the Washington event were climate scientist Michael Mann, science communicator Bill Nye, former NASA Administrator Bill Nelson and federal lawmakers including Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland) and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Maryland).

Rep. Bill Foster (D-Illinois) also spoke, cheered as he was introduced as the only member of Congress with a doctoral degree in physics. But some cheers turned to boos when he told the crowd there were many like him in Congress, members of both parties, “who really believe in science.”

“Where are they?” someone shouted from the crowd.

Foster urged rallygoers to continue calling their elected representatives, saying it would give them “if not the stiffness of spine, at least the viscosity of spine.”

“When you’re speaking the truth, your voice has a natural amplifier to it that you’re not always aware of,” Foster said.

All the upheaval has created confusion and worry about the future even among nongovernment scientists, who depend on those agencies to support their work. That has been especially true for younger scientists starting their careers, uncertain about what sorts of opportunities there might be for research funding in the years ahead.

Young scientists came out in large numbers on Friday.

Among them was Stella McCarthy, 21, who will be graduating from DeSales University in Center Valley, Pennsylvania, this May with a degree in biology with plans of becoming a physician assistant.

But just as she’s starting her career in medicine, she said she is troubled by what she sees as an attack on her field. She’s seen close friends lose job opportunities in medical research for cancer and immunology because of federal cuts and decided to spend part of her spring break with her sister by joining the crowd by the Lincoln Memorial standing up for science.

She stood by the reflecting pool, holding a handmade sign that read: “AMERICA IS GREAT BECAUSE OF SCIENCE.”

“We have been feeling very frustrated and passionate about everything that’s been happening in the political world,” McCarthy said. “People just have lost the meaning of the word great.”