Nidhi Subbaraman

@nidhisubs.bsky.social

Science reporter, ex-WSJ. Signal: @nidhisubs.11

The U.S. Department of Justice has reached a $15 million NIH grant fraud settlement with Dana-Farber Cancer Center. This resolves a False Claims Act qui tam complaint that I filed on behalf of @sholtodavid.bsky.social in April 2024, with Gregg Shapiro as my co-counsel.

News & Publications

Eugenie Reich & Gregg Shapiro Announce $15 Million NIH Grant Fraud Settlement (December 2025) Complaint Settlement Agreement Scientific Fraud in the 21st Century (Video Lecture) Sandia Nationa…

eugeniereichlaw.com

BREAKING: per email sent to agency staff NIH will _NOT_ reterminate the ~900 grants which were reinstated. "[W]e would strongly recommend against re-terminating such grants, because it will likely be viewed as a reapplication of the now-vacated Challenged Directives."

After conferring with DOJ, we'd like to provide the following guidance on the implications of last week's Supreme Court's decision. First, the Challenged Directives identified in the Rite to adamante o tune romain verated and cannot be applied to the identified plaintiffs in the two cases going forward. Second, for any terminated grant that has nc already been reinstated, NIH may stop all work toward reinstating those few grants, if any. Third, for those grants reinstated by NIH in response to the June judgments, we would strongly recommend against re-terminating such grants, because it will likely be viewed as a reapplication of the now-vacated Challenged Directives. We would also refer you to the Acting General Counsel's attached 6/25/25 opinion on the legal risks in terminating awards for nonalignment with priorities at this time.
The Supreme Court's decision was an interim order while the cases proceed with the appeals of the phase 1 judgements before the First Circuit Court of Appeals. We will keep you posted on those proceedings. In the interim, please let us know if you have any questions.

NEW: Trump's SCOTUS appointees each shared alarming views in allowing NIH grant cuts. Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett each wrote something in the shadow docket case — disturbing opinions in light of broader attacks on the rule of law. Today, at Law Dork:

Trump's SCOTUS appointees each shared alarming views in allowing NIH grant cuts

Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett each wrote something in the shadow docket case — disturbing opinions in light of broader attacks on the rule of law.

lawdork.com

"The first sentence of his grant summary included the word “diverse,” but that pertained to “diverse airborne toxicants." Nurkiewicz finally got his renewed funding after he changed the phrase to “a large variety of airborne toxicants." www.wsj.com/health/scien...

Scientists Strip ‘Diversity’ Language From Research to Keep Federal Grants

Some researchers say NIH employees have told them to make the revisions in order to have funding renewed.

wsj.com

Though RFK Jr. said he would add scientists to the HHS workforce, agencies have lost thousands of them, along with colleagues who those scientists depended on to dispatch checks, fix computers and order lab supplies, enabling them to do their jobs. Super important work by @propublica.org colleagues.

Gutted: How Deeply Trump Has Cut Federal Health Agencies

More than 20,500 workers have left or been pushed out of federal health agencies, a ProPublica analysis found. Staffers say the cuts will leave their agencies less equipped to conduct studies, perform...

projects.propublica.org

The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed the Trump administration for now to withhold hundreds of millions of dollars in health research grants on topics the White House finds objectionable www.wsj.com/us-news/law/... w Louise Radnofsky

Supreme Court Lets Trump Administration Halt Funding for Some Research Grants

A lower court had found the administration violated the law by canceling work involving DEI, transgender and Covid issues, among others.

wsj.com