Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · 7d

I've never, ever seen a judicial opinion like this. 😮

SCOTUS catches all the headlines for good reason. But the vast majority of legal disputes begin and end in trial courts.

And Federal district (i.e., trial) courts are so over the Trump admin's bullshit. Exhibit 1A (pun intended) is Judge Young.

Andy Sellars @sellars.bsky.social · 7d

AAUP v. Rubio is out, and look at how it starts. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

Ahead of the case caption, a handwritten note: "Trump has pardons and tanks . . . . what do you have?" Judge Young's reply: "Dear Mr. or Ms. Anonymous,
Alone, I have nothing but my
sense of duty.
Together, We the People of the
United States –- you and me --
have our magnificent Constitution.
Here’s how that works out in a
specific case –- "

1 2 11

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · 18d

🍻🍾🎉

Side note: Gotta hand it to the student reporters at @theharvardcrimson.bsky.social. They’ve been all over this stuff for months.

Harvard Receives $46 Million in Federal Grants, Ending 4-Month Freeze | News | The Harvard Crimson

Millions of dollars in federal research grants from the National Institutes of Health have begun to flow to Harvard, the first grant money to return to the University since the Trump administration’s ...

www.thecrimson.com

1 24 80

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · 19d

Josey, Delaney, et al. (2023). Air Pollution and Mortality at the Intersection of Race and Social Class. NEJM.

We show that stronger air pollution regulations benefit all Americans, and disproportionately harmed lower income and Black Americans benefit most.

www.nejm.org/doi/full/10....

2 9

Reposted by Scott Delaney

Erin Sikorsky @erinsikorsky.bsky.social · 20d

The National Academies' response to the EPA's proposed removal of the endangerment finding is out today. It does not mince words about the effect of GHGs on the climate. Kudos to the authors.

Key paragraph below; you can read the whole thing here: nas.us8.list-manage.com/track/click?...

42 97

Reposted by Scott Delaney

Jaweed Kaleem @jaweedkaleem.bsky.social · 21d

Facing a proposed $1.2-billion fine and severe medical research grant cuts at UCLA, the University of California has not gone head-to-head with Trump in court.

So on Tuesday, groups representing more than 100,000 of its employees did.

www.latimes.com/california/s...

UC employees, not waiting on leaders, sue Trump for 'financial coercion' over UCLA cuts

University of California faculty, students and staff on Tuesday sued President Trump over a $1.2-million penalty against UCLA and federal demands over campus changes. They argued that the actions camp...

www.latimes.com

11 120 390

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · 22d

This is the energy we need.

Rebecca Fielding-Miller @rebeccafieldingmiller.com · 22d

As a UC employee*:
Fuck off into the sun forever with this bullshit and then continue to get fucked until you land in another sun 10 million light years from this one.

*Opinion not representative of the UC system. Unfortunately.

The letter asks the university to declare “to the UCLA community” that it does not recognize transgender people’s gender identities. The government also wants the university to make clear through the statement and on its website that it does not welcome transgender people on sports teams, in bathrooms, or single-sex dorm rooms that match their gender identities.

1 3 12

Reposted by Scott Delaney

Rebecca Fielding-Miller @rebeccafieldingmiller.com · 22d

As a UC employee*:
Fuck off into the sun forever with this bullshit and then continue to get fucked until you land in another sun 10 million light years from this one.

*Opinion not representative of the UC system. Unfortunately.

1 17 40

Reposted by Scott Delaney

Alejandra Caraballo @esqueer.net · 28d

JUST IN: A judge quashed the subpoena to Boston Children's Hospital by the DoJ that sought the records of trans patients.

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

A court order from the United States District Court, dated September 9, 2025, in case 1:25-mc-91324-MJJ. The order grants a Motion to Quash a subpoena.
Highlighted text explains the judge's reasoning: that the subpoena reflects the administration's disapproval of the transgender community, and its true purpose is to interfere with gender-affirming care in Massachusetts, harass the hospital, and intimidate patients. The judge finds the government failed to show proper purpose and that the subpoena was "motivated only by bad faith."
The order is signed by Judge Myong J. Joun.

51 870 3.7K

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · 29d

Y'all. The NIH NOAs are starting to flow at Harvard.

💪✊🥳

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Sep 3

FINALLY: Harvard [mostly] wins.

We'll see what happens next.

www.courtlistener.com/docket/69921...

2 5 52

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Sep 5

I suppose I shouldn't fault the reporters here. It's clearly something people are wondering about.

The broader point is that the way we think about legal issues has been completely upended.

And the reason, I think, is that we're collectively just much less confident in the rule of law these days.

2

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Sep 5

Sure, I get it. But the question wasn’t “Given SCOTUS lawlessness, should Harvard settle?” Which might be more defensible

Instead, it was “Now that Harvard won, should Harvard settle?”

Harvard won big. Trump lost big. In a normal world, we’d be asking Trump if he should settle or cave, not Harvard

1 2

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Sep 5

Holy hell what warped timeline are we in right now??

Harvard beat Trump in court. But I've been asked by 3 different reporters whether Harvard should settle with Trump now that it won.

Would you ask a robbery victim to hand over his wallet right after the robber was found guilty?

Come on, man. 🤦‍♂️

2 3 28

Reposted by Scott Delaney

Molly Jong-Fast @mollyjongfast.bsky.social · Sep 3

They keep losing in court because everything they’re doing is illegal

510 4.7K 23K

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Sep 3

Same tbh. Seriously

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Sep 3

FINALLY: Harvard [mostly] wins.

We'll see what happens next.

www.courtlistener.com/docket/69921...

3 15 72

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Sep 2

I had forgotten how jaw-dropping these curves were. 👀

Jeremy Berg @jeremymberg.bsky.social · Sep 1

Yes, it was carefully hidden in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine (www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1... )

1/2

A graph comparing COVID incidence after the Pfizer vaccine compared to placebo

1 3 17

Reposted by Scott Delaney

Jeremy Berg @jeremymberg.bsky.social · Sep 1

Moderna vaccine (www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1... )

2/2

A graph showing the efficacy of the Moderna COVID vaccine versus placebo.

10 130 780

Reposted by Scott Delaney

Jeremy Berg @jeremymberg.bsky.social · Sep 1

Yes, it was carefully hidden in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine (www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1... )

1/2

76 840 2.9K

Reposted by Scott Delaney

Jeremy Berg @jeremymberg.bsky.social · Aug 30

Good 🧵on grant terminations

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Aug 29

NEW: Don't ask too many questions, but...

NIH may not re-terminate the 900ish grants at issue in the main NIH lawsuits after all.

To the PIs of reinstated grants, SPEND NOW!

🧵 Here's what NIH is probably thinking. Bear with me:

21 45

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Aug 29

Presupposing the Trump Admin takes the advice of HHS lawyers and chooses not to re-terminate the 900ish grants, this is helpful for another reason:

NIH staff are busting their asses to get awards out the door before the end of FY25. If they had to re-terminate, they'd lose time to make new awards.

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Aug 29

NEW: Don't ask too many questions, but...

NIH may not re-terminate the 900ish grants at issue in the main NIH lawsuits after all.

To the PIs of reinstated grants, SPEND NOW!

🧵 Here's what NIH is probably thinking. Bear with me:

1 1 5

Reposted by Scott Delaney

Dan Garisto @dangaristo.bsky.social · Aug 29

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.

4 39 96

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Aug 29

Here's @dangaristo.bsky.social with a copy of OGC's email ⬇️

Dan Garisto @dangaristo.bsky.social · Aug 29

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."

2 3 9

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Aug 29

In fact, OGC's email yesterday to NIH staff explicitly referenced the July OGC memo that @aniloza.bsky.social covered in the story above.

So while this is good news for now, these grants aren't out of the woods yet.

Which is just to say, again, if you have a reinstated grant, SPEND SPEND SPEND!

1 5 17

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Aug 29

It's also key to note that NIH thinks it'll have more power to terminate grants for policy reasons starting Oct 1. See earlier reporting from @aniloza.bsky.social.

It's possible OGC / NIH is simply waiting to re-terminate until after Oct 1 so they can rely on this (still legally dubious) power.

8/

HHS devises legal playbook for future grant terminations, internal memo shows

Exclusive: HHS devises a legal playbook for future research grant terminations, an internal memo shows.

www.statnews.com

1 11 23

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · Aug 29

Notably, OGC also said grants in the case that had NOT yet been reinstated could remain terminated.

So if your grant should have been reinstated, but NIH hadn't processed the reinstatement yet, you're SOL.

We don't know how many grants fall into this bucket, but I don't think it's too many.

7/

1 6 16