MIT joins group of universities suing the DOD over funding cuts
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology has joined a lawsuit against the Department of Defense (DOD) over funding cuts related to indirect costs for military-based research.
The institution joins a group of 11 other universities, including Brown University in Rhode Island, and three higher education organizations that filed the complaint against the DOD on Monday.
Boston University supported the lawsuit as a member of the Association of American Universities.
As of Tuesday, a federal judge had approved a temporary restraining order to halt the implementation of the cuts.
'We underscore that MIT drives US national security through its cutting-edge research, defense innovation and substantial contributions to military leadership,' said Kimberly Allen, a spokesperson for MIT, in an email.
DOD declined to comment because it is ongoing litigation. Boston University didn't immediately respond to requests for comment on Wednesday.
'DOD's latest action would have an immediate and dire effect on our national security by disrupting research designed to help our military,' the group of those suing said in a statement released Monday.
Read more: MIT sues federal science agency over cuts to 'crucial research'
The lawsuit comes in response to the DOD's announcement that it would limit facilities and administrative reimbursements to a 15% cap for all DOD research grants. Facilities and administrative costs include maintenance and administrative staff, research facilities and safety expenses, among others, which the group cites as being essential costs in maintaining the country's status as a leader in military technology research.
Initially proposed by U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth in a memo sent on May 14, the cuts are set to save the DOD $900 million per year, according to Hegseth.
According to court filings, MIT received $107 million in funding from the DOD in the 2024 fiscal year. They estimate that a 15% cap on Facilities and administrative expenses by the DOD would result in an estimated loss of $21 million annually. MIT has expressed it intends to apply for new funding awards from the DOD in addition to pending funding proposals.
MIT is also involved in lawsuits against other federal organizations over cuts to indirect costs in other departments, namely the National Institute of Health, the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Science Foundation.
'Far reaching consequences' — UMass Amherst sounds the alarm amid federal uncertainty
As federal funding cuts hit Harvard, a private investment firm and other donors step up
20 NIH grants restored to UMass system after judge rules against Trump admin
Trump admin asks court to rule against Harvard without a trial
Federal judge orders Trump admin to reinstate hundreds of NIH grants
Read the original article on MassLive.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
23 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Silicon Valley Wants to Woo the Pope on Matters of AI - Tech News Briefing
The tech revolution drove Pope Leo XIV's decision to select his papal name, and gave the world a glimpse of his priorities leading the Catholic Church. WSJ reporter Margherita Stancati discusses the long-running dialogue between Silicon Valley and the Vatican. Plus, Oracle is lending a hand to small tech companies that want to do business with the U.S. government. WSJ CIO reporter Belle Lin brings us the exclusive details of a new program, and what's in it for the multinational tech giant. Sign up for the WSJ's free Technology newsletter.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
U.S. Soccer Star Dishes On 'Weird' Oval Office Moment With Donald Trump
U.S. Men's National Soccer Team star Timothy Weah has opened up about what he described as the 'weird' experience of standing behind Donald Trump in the Oval Office while the president fielded questions on the Iran-Israel war and attacked the idea of transgender women competing in women's sports. Weah was at the White House with his Juventus teammates on Wednesday as part of a promotional event for the FIFA Club World Cup, ahead of the Italian side's 5-0 victory over the United Arab Emirates' Al-Ain FC. Advertisement Trump invited questions from reporters about the game and the 2026 FIFA World Cup, which the U.S. will host alongside Mexico and Canada. But the Juventus players stood uncomfortably behind POTUS as he instead answered queries about the more pressing political questions of the day. Weah, the son of former Liberian soccer star-turned-former president George Weah, later told reporters that the players had been made to attend the event. 'They told us that we have to go and I had no choice but to go,' he explained, reported The Athletic. 'I was caught by surprise, honestly. It was a bit weird,' he added. 'When he started talking about the politics with Iran and everything, it's kind of like, I just want to play football, man.' Related...
Forbes
25 minutes ago
- Forbes
Trump Can Retain Control Of National Guard In LA, Appeals Court Rules
A federal appeals court on Thursday night ruled that the California National Guard troops—deployed in Los Angeles last week amid protests against the federal government's crackdown on immigrants—can remain under President Donald Trump's control while the state's legal challenge against the deployment moves forward. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that on matters such as federalizing the California National Guard, any decision must be 'highly deferential' towards the president, and the court concluded that ' it is likely that the President lawfully exercised his statutory authority.' However, the ruling disagreed with the White House's primary argument that such a matter 'is completely insulated from judicial review.' The appellate court ruling blocks an already paused ruling issued by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer that ordered the president to 'return control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California forthwith.' The ruling only focused on the issue of presidential authority and did not address the claim made in Trump's order that the protests amounted to a 'form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.' California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a statement saying, 'While it is disappointing that our temporary restraining order has been stayed pending the federal government's appeal, this case is far from over…our state and local law enforcement officers responded effectively to isolated episodes of violence at otherwise peaceful protests and the President deliberately sought to create the very chaos and crises he claimed to be addressing.' Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote on X: 'The court rightly rejected Trump's claim that he can do whatever he wants with the National Guard and not have to explain himself to a court. The President is not a king and is not above the law. We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against citizens.' In a post on his Truth Social platform, the president hailed the ruling as a 'BIG WIN,' and attacked the California Governor, saying: 'The Judges obviously realized that Gavin Newscum is incompetent and ill prepared.' Trump then signaled he could deploy forces to tackle protests in other states, saying: 'this is much bigger than Gavin, because all over the United States, if our Cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should State and Local Police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done.' The appeals court ruling noted that precedent from earlier rulings cited by the Trump administration, 'does not compel us to accept the federal government's position that the President could federalize the National Guard based on no evidence whatsoever, and that courts would be unable to review a decision that was obviously absurd or made in bad faith.' Trump Keeps Control Of National Guard In Los Angeles After Appeals Court Pauses Ruling (Forbes)
