A rally protesting against the Trump administration’s cuts to federal scientific funding in New York in March 2025 highlighted growing opposition to the president's policies. The Guardian’s editorial argues that Donald Trump’s war on science has been vicious and damaging, but he has lost some key battles. Last year, Trump demanded a 50% cut to federal scientific and medical research funding, yet Congress passed a budget with a slight overall increase, though specific targets like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were reduced. He continues to undermine science through actions such as dismissing the board overseeing the National Science Foundation.
Political Defeats and a Growing Movement
Trump’s attacks have been nakedly political, but the bipartisan pro-science consensus remains intact, holding him in check. Scientists are increasingly engaging in politics, with 314 Action reporting over 700 candidates seeking its support for the midterm elections—three times the usual number, many citing the White House’s war on science as motivation.
Global Patterns of Populist Attacks on Science
This phenomenon is not unique to the US. Jair Bolsonaro’s rule in Brazil saw attacks on scientists and environmental funding cuts. In India, Narendra Modi’s government removed evolution from school textbooks. In Britain, Reform UK has targeted net zero spending. Having scientists in office won’t solve the problem alone, but they are now part of the coalition resisting populist politics.
The Scientific Social Contract Under Threat
Historians note a post-war social contract where the state funds research but avoids political interference. Many scientists believe engaging in politics endangers this compact, but the foundation of their relationship with the state is under attack. The right has sown doubt about health and climate science, while the left pushes for diversity and social value, compromising scientific autonomy in earlier views.
Scientists are now defending the idea that science should be independent of politics. By protesting, speaking to the public, and running for office, they gain a better understanding of the changing public sphere. The public may gain an ally against right-wing populism and deeper engagement with scientific challenges. Trump set out to tame scientists but may have politicised them instead.
