Trump Administration’s OMB Proposal Threatens Federal Grant-Making

In May 2026 the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), led by director Russell Vought, released a 400-page rule that would shift control of roughly $1 trillion in federal grants to political appointees by October. The rule targets “woke” policies, bans diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs, and bars funding for entities deemed to promote “anti-American values.” It would also permit cancellation of awards “no longer in the federal government’s interest,” a power researchers first felt in spring 2025 when grants on disparate impacts and gender were terminated. The proposal limits public comment to 45 days—shorter than the usual 60-90-day window—and closed the comment period in the week of July 20 2026 after receiving nearly 500,000 submissions, about 95 % of which oppose the rule.

The Guardian

Scientists from fields ranging from astrophysics to marine biology have organized to contest the rule, warning that it could jeopardize research across the entire federal funding landscape. Harvard School of Public Health professor Nancy Krieger, whose NIH grant was canceled in 2025, described the climate as “censorship” and “blunt use of power.” Twenty-two state attorneys general, including California’s Rob Bonta, have signaled intent to sue. The Heritage Foundation, a Washington-DC think tank behind Project 2025, backs the proposal, while the White House “fraud taskforce” argues it will stop taxpayer dollars from supporting “woke NGOs.”

The Guardian

Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) condemned the rule as illegal and a threat to public health. Sara Rosenbaum, professor emerita at George Washington University, noted that the volume of opposition makes it unlikely the administration will withdraw the rule, though she cautioned against expecting a “reasonable” outcome. Georgetown Law’s Lawrence Gostin characterized the comment period as a “subterfuge,” and legal scholars anticipate that any challenge will require plaintiffs to first suffer a denied grant before establishing standing. The ultimate fate may hinge on decisions from conservative appellate courts and the Supreme Court.

The Guardian

• “President Trump and [OMB director] Russell Vought are not only breaking the law, but they are also once again endangering the health and safety of Americans,” — Tammy Baldwin, Democratic senator of Wisconsin

The Guardian

• “The Trump administration is once again attempting to weaponize essential federal funding to advance its policy priorities. Except this time, it’s not just one agency, it’s almost all of them,” — Rob Bonta, California attorney general

The Guardian

• “Basically, in my mind, the notice and comment is just a subterfuge for moving ahead when they’re really not interested in what the comments say,” — Lawrence Gostin, professor of global public health, Georgetown Law

The Guardian

• “It’s the entirety of the federal grant-making process,” — Sara Rosenbaum, professor emerita of health law and policy, Milken Institute School of Public Health

The Guardian