Post
(Not dunking on @wamsleylab.bsky.social she’s right, I would just use a more active verb.)
A few notes ‘42 U.S.C. § 1862(a)(1) says NSF is "authorized and directed" to support research in the mathematical, physical, medical, biological, SOCIAL, and other sciences.’ www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/...
42 U.S.C. § 19055 (CHIPS § 10346) requires the Director to solicit SBE researchers for cross-cutting programs and to put them on merit review panels. Arguably this is Congress asserting SBE will exist! www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/...
This statute (Public Law 115-402 115th Congress, 2018) says “the Director… working through SBE…” That provision makes no sense if SBE is dead (Edited 11:48 via @skeetsapp.com)
But let’s be real: this is killing SBE, it’s in violation of the law and constitution, and judges that aren’t part of the P2025 political project would say that. The underlying problem is the Supreme Court is corrupt and doing politics. If not for that Vought would never get away w killing SBE.
19 reposts98 likes
And this too. Geosciences.
Would be curious if they're winding down other divisions in a similar way but on a slower time table. The number of grants provided by the Geosciences division was halved this year compared to prior years, the *explicit expectation* is for it to be halved again next year. Comparing notes is good.