Resources on APLU, AAU, & ACE Legal Action Contesting NIH Cuts to F&A Reimbursement Rates
UPDATES
April 5, 2025: “We are grateful for the federal district court’s permanent injunction and judgment halting the implementation, application, or enforcement of the National Institutes of Health’s February 7 supplemental guidance imposing a cap of 15% on facilities and administration (F&A) costs reimbursement to universities who receive NIH research grants. The judgment entered yesterday was the product of a joint motion from the plaintiffs, including the Association of American Universities, the American Council on Education, the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, twelve higher education institutions, the Association of American Medical Colleges, and 22 states’ attorneys general. The court’s injunction, previously temporary, will continue to apply to all institutions nationwide.”
March 5, 2025: Judge Angel Kelley of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts today issued a preliminary injunction halting the implementation, application, or enforcement of the National Institutes of Health’s February 7 supplemental guidance imposing a cap of 15% on facilities and administration (F&A) costs reimbursement to universities who receive NIH research grants. The injunction applies to all institutions nationwide. This preliminary injunction replaces the temporary restraining order that had been in place since February 11, which also halted the implementation of the supplemental guidance.
While a temporary restraining order is put in place when a court determines that plaintiffs have provided enough evidence to show that irreparable harm is likely to result if an action is not halted temporarily, a preliminary injunction requires a higher standard of review. The ruling means that the judge has considered not only the harms that the enjoined action is likely to cause, but also the potential merits of the underlying case.
The injunction follows a hearing held on February 21, 2025, during which both the representatives from separate lawsuits as well as the government presented arguments concerning the motion for preliminary injunction. The three lawsuits were filed by APLU, AAU, ACE, 12 universities, and one university system; the Association of American Medical Colleges; and 22 state attorneys general. The government is expected to appeal the decision.
February 21: Judge Angel Kelly of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts extended the court’s temporary restraining order (TRO) as it considers the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction. The TRO, which was previously set to expire today, blocks NIH’s implementation of cuts to the F&A rate.
February 12: On Tuesday, February 11, Judge Angel Kelley confirmed that the motion by APLU-AAU-ACE for a temporary restraining order (TRO) need not be granted because her TRO granted earlier in the day in a similar Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) lawsuit covers all institutions in all states nationwide. The three associations are heartened that the NIH research F&A cut is fully blocked from implementation under that order. A hearing in the APLU-AAU-ACE case, the AAMC case, and the Attorneys’ General suit has been set for next Friday, February 21 regarding an extension of the emergency TRO and next steps for progressing to the injunction phase of litigation. The APLU-AAU-ACE case will be represented by lead counsel Paul Clement from Clement & Murphy, along with Jenner & Block.
APLU, AAU, & ACE Legal Action Contest NIH Cuts to F&A Reimbursement Rates
February 10: Washington, DC – The Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU) today joined with the Association of American Universities (AAU) and the American Council on Education (ACE) as plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging the NIH’s action limiting Facilities and Administrative (F&A) reimbursements (indirect cost rate) to a 15% rate for the agency’s research grants.
The following is a statement from the APLU, AAU, and ACE:
“On Friday, February 7, 2025, the administration declared that it would cut funding for life-saving medical research. Its announcement that it would limit Facilities and Administrative (F&A) reimbursements to a 15% rate for all NIH research grants would have an immediate and dire impact on critical biomedical and health research nationwide. F&A costs are the real and necessary costs of conducting the groundbreaking research that has led to so many medical breakthroughs over the past decades. A cut to F&A for NIH grants is a cut to the medical research that helps countless American families whose loved ones face incurable diseases or untreatable debilitating conditions.
“Besides harming the ability of research universities to continue doing critical NIH research that seeks out new and more effective approaches to treating cancer, heart disease, and dementia, among others, and translating basic science into cures, this cut would also undermine universities’ essential training of the next generation of biomedical and health science researchers. The loss of this American workforce pipeline would be a blow to the U.S. economy, to American science and innovation, to patients and their families, and to our nation’s position in the world as a leader in medical research.
“It would be, quite simply, a self-inflicted wound.
“Today we have jointly filed suit in United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, along with a number of impacted research university co-plaintiffs, seeking to halt the proposed cut. Besides its devastating impact on medical research and training, the proposed actions run afoul of the longstanding regulatory frameworks governing federal grants and foundational principles of administrative law. Judicial relief is amply justified and urgently needed. This action is ill-conceived and self-defeating for both America’s patients and their families as well as the nation as a whole. We look forward to presenting our case in court.”
###
Related resources:
Stay Connected
X (formerly Twitter)
Facebook
YouTube
LinkedIn
RSS