News

Federal Grant Freeze Causes Confusion for Cancer Centers

In a week marked by a flurry of executive actions and legal challenges, the White House's funding freeze directive triggered widespread concern throughout the cancer center community. The rapidly evolving situation, which stems from a series of executive orders issued by President Trump, has raised critical questions about the day-to-day operations of government-funded health agencies.

View the timeline of events compiled by Research!America.

Executive Orders and Federal Spending Freeze

The administration’s numerous executive orders include provisions on reducing federal spending, increasing oversight of federal programs, and prioritizing domestic energy production and immigration enforcement. Several orders also target diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, gender-related policies, environmental programs, and international agreements.

On Tuesday, January 21, Acting Health and Human Services Secretary Dorothy A. Fink, MD, issued a directive pausing public communications and documents through Saturday, February 1, signaling the administration’s tightening control over agency operations. This was followed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memorandum on Monday, January 27 that directed federal agencies to halt spending on funding linked to the executive orders. The directive, set to take effect on Tuesday, January 28 at 5:00 pm eastern time, required agencies to review financial assistance programs and report affected projects by Monday, February 10.

Confusion and Immediate Legal Challenges

On January 28, the OMB released a 52-page document requiring agencies to identify and review all federal financial assistance programs and supporting activities and to temporarily pause obligations and disbursements, while reporting planned disbursements through Saturday, March 15. According to the memo, responses are due Friday, February 7, with agencies also required to designate senior political appointees to oversee compliance. While OMB later clarified that programs such as Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Pell Grants, Head Start, and student loans are exempt, agencies were instructed to consult OMB for further guidance.

As concerns mounted, legal challenges surfaced almost immediately:

  • A coalition of nonprofits and small businesses filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, contesting the legality of the funding freeze.
  • Twenty-three Democratic state attorneys general launched a separate lawsuit in Rhode Island, challenging the spending restrictions.
Meanwhile, U.S. District Judge John McConnell, Jr., Rhode Island, indicated that he is inclined to block the freeze, citing concerns over its lasting impact on states and organizations reliant on federal funds. He has directed the 23 state attorneys general to draft a restraining order, which the Justice Department must respond to within 24 hours after submission. 

Just minutes before the freeze was set to take effect on January 28, U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan, District of Columbia, issued a temporary restraining order that halted the funding pause until 5:00 pm eastern time on Monday, February 3 and scheduled a hearing for 11:00 am ET on that date to further assess the case. 

In response to the temporary restraining order, the OMB rescinded its original January 27 memo on Wednesday, January 29. However, the administration maintained that the review of financial assistance programs would continue. Further complicating matters, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt tweeted that agencies must still identify and pause funding subject to the executive orders.

According to Roll Call, at the end of the February 3 hearing, Judge AliKhan indicated she was inclined to rule in favor of national nonprofit groups that had challenged the freeze directed by the OMB memo. She noted that the Trump administration still appears to be blocking funds despite court orders, pointing to Leavitt's social media post as potential evidence that "the stayed and rescinded order is still in effect." Judge AliKhan said she is likely to issue another temporary restraining order. 

AACI’s Response

One of AACI's core public policy priorities is advocating for cancer research funding, and we know that research supported by the NIH and NCI is critical to advancing treatment and cures.

AACI released the following statement on January 28:

While pauses on federal programs are not without precedent during a presidential transition, a prolonged federal funding freeze will have devastating consequences for scientific research, stifling innovation and slowing progress against cancer. The Association of American Cancer Institutes (AACI) will continue monitoring federal funding restrictions and their impact on the association’s more than 100 cancer center members. AACI’s primary public policy advocacy goal is ensuring robust, predictable federal funding for cancer research.

The coming days and weeks will be crucial in shaping the future of federal funding under the new administration. As legal battles unfold, organizations and institutions affected by the freeze are urged to document its impact and engage with lawmakers to advocate for funding protections. AACI has provided a customizable letter for cancer center members to share with their members of Congress.

We recognize that AACI’s members represent a wide variety of institutions nationwide, and that some advocacy activities may be restricted. Please confirm your institution’s policies before contacting your representatives.

AACI stands strong with our cancer center members in our commitment to accelerate progress against cancer and to protect and support cancer research, cancer centers, and patients with cancer.

Contact Your Legislators