antsara.bsky.social
27 posts
33 followers
36 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
I'm Jewish and this is what I would have said. Language often means something different to others than what we intend. What does a Palestinian American hear when my synagogue says "We stand with Israel"? I'm guessing, "we don't care about Gazan children". Censoring speech is a slippery slope.
comment in response to
post
Jfc. We are flushing our future down the toilet.
comment in response to
post
Major US climate website likely to be shut down after almost all staff fired www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025...
comment in response to
post
This would be the largest public lands sell-off in modern U.S. history and it's happening with no hearings, no debate, and no public input.
See what public lands would be available for sale:
www.wilderness.org/articles/med...
comment in response to
post
I am guessing this is because there is a new injunction on enforcement of the DEI-related EOs, including the certification provision:
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
comment in response to
post
Because there is a flag relay scheduled along that route.
comment in response to
post
Do these data include the out-year commitments for new grants, for which half of the FY RPG budget has been allocated? This seems to be a new policy, replacing the annual non-compete process. Page 5 of the NIH CJ Overview below.
comment in response to
post
This is how my institution decided the issue, and we have heard the same across the board from other research-intensive universities. But note there is a claw-back provision, so the risk exposure will grow over time. One "whistleblower" next year could lead to a $20M clawback. Would bankrupt us.
comment in response to
post
Same for IOS (92%) and MCB (89%). All of fundamental biology wiped out, unclear how this could even happen without also terminating a bunch of current awards.
comment in response to
post
90% for fundamental biology (DEB, IOS, MCB, see p. 215). Greatest % reduction across entire portfolio.
comment in response to
post
It is actually worse then that - fundamental biology at all levels, from environmental biology to organismal systems to molecular and cell bio, facing 90% cut, largest percentage cut across the entire portfolio (see p. 215). My entire integrative Bio dept's research program would be wiped out.
comment in response to
post
www.science.org/content/arti...
comment in response to
post
Statutes, not status.
comment in response to
post
3/3 Laying the groundwork through an appeal using the award terms and conditions process feels like an important first step.
comment in response to
post
NSF in particular seems like the best case for ultimately prevailing in court, given how clear the status mandated are going back.many decades (eg America COMPETES Act and prior).
comment in response to
post
Does your institution plan to contest the termination, on the grounds that promoting STEM participation by women and minority populations is congressionally mandated for NSF and cannot be dropped as an agency priority?
comment in response to
post
The Research Coordination Network for Undergraduate Biology Education (RCN-UBE) program was archived one day before its Jan 28 deadline - a fabulous program to bring college educators together around innovations in the classroom.
comment in response to
post
It is only Maine at this point.
comment in response to
post
We had same experience with RCN-UBE - program was archived literally as we were getting ready to hit submit.
comment in response to
post
Confusing language - does this invalidate the order to cease EO-related activities, or just mean that they can't stop payment for those activities now, but could investigate non-compliance and claw back money via audit later because the directive was in effect? Not sure what to tell my faculty.
comment in response to
post
Will not directly block a suspension/termination while being reviewed, but thousands of review requests would be noticed. NSF's mission is better protected by statute than many other agencies, and we should be using every tool we have.
comment in response to
post
Every NSF PI should dispute their suspension order, providing the Hierarchy of Authorities figure and relevant statutory requirements from the America COMPETES Act and CHIPS and Science Act as evidence that improper procedures were followed and NSF did not follow their own precedence policy.
comment in response to
post
According to the current PAPPG (NSF 24-1), PIs have 30 days to request of a review of any NSF-initiated suspension or termination of a grant in whole or in part.
Note criteria for review.
new.nsf.gov/policies/pap...