Universities, Research Groups, and California Attorney General Challenge Trump Administration's Proposed Federal Grant Rule

Jul 13, 2026

A coalition of universities, research advocates, and 22 state attorneys general led by California's Rob Bonta are demanding the withdrawal of a proposed OMB rule that would overhaul the administration of over $1 trillion in annual federal grants. Critics argue the rule would unconstitutionally politicize scientific research and public services by allowing political appointees to block or terminate funding based on presidential priorities. Meanwhile, OMB Director Russ Vought defends the proposal as a measure to improve transparency and ensure federal awards align with the administration's agenda.

OMB federal grant rule proposal

▪The proposed Office of Management and Budget rule would require a pre-issuance review of discretionary grants by senior political appointees to align awards with the president's policy priorities.
▪The proposed Office of Management and Budget rule would grant federal agencies broader discretion to unilaterally modify or terminate grants and restrict international research collaboration.
▪The Office of Management and Budget's proposed rule received more than 275,000 public comments by the deadline of July 13, 2026.
▪The White House Office of Management and Budget proposed a rule on May 29, 2026, titled the Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance, to revise federal grant guidance.
▪The Office of Management and Budget's proposed rule would impact more than $1 trillion in federal grants and cooperative agreements obligated by the federal government each year.

NIH biomedical research funding concerns

▪Johns Hopkins University and Georgetown University formally opposed the proposed Office of Management and Budget rule, arguing it would weaken the merit-based peer-review system and destabilize innovation.
▪A coalition of 57 patient groups, led by United for Cures, urged congressional leaders on July 13, 2026, to push for the withdrawal of the proposed Office of Management and Budget rule.
▪Patient and scientific research groups warn that the proposed Office of Management and Budget rule would politicize the National Institutes of Health grant process and undermine U.S. biomedical research.

Congressional opposition to grant rule

▪Senate Democrats sent a letter to Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought on July 1, 2026, urging him to rescind the grant proposal.
▪Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins urged the Office of Management and Budget to extend the comment period and withdraw portions of the rule that burden scientific research.

State governors oppose grant rule

▪California Attorney General Rob Bonta joined a coalition of 22 attorneys general and two governors in submitting a comment letter opposing the Office of Management and Budget's proposed rule.
▪The Governors Public Health Alliance, representing 15 Democratic governors, submitted a comment letter stating the proposed rule would cause devastating financial setbacks for state public health infrastructure.

House Democrats reproductive health resolution

▪Representatives Lateefah Simon, Sydney Kamlager-Dove, and Ayanna Pressley introduced the For All Our Futures Act to counter Republican efforts to strip Planned Parenthood of Medicaid funding.
▪House Democrats unveiled a resolution on July 13, 2026, called the For All Our Futures Act, to assert federal rights to maternal health services, abortion, and paid family leave.

No Surprises Act enforcement debate

▪More than 50 employers and employer groups wrote to the House Ways and Means Committee opposing the No Surprises Act Enforcement Act, claiming it would increase system abuse.
▪The Coalition Against Surprise Medical Billing launched a six-figure ad campaign on July 13, 2026, opposing a bipartisan bill that tightens No Surprises Act enforcement.