The Situation at Columbia XIV

More is coming out about the awful implications of the ongoing refusal by the trustees to in any way challenge the Trump administration’s funding cancellations. See this open letter in the Columbia Spectator, which begins:

On March 10, the federal grant funding the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study was terminated by the National Institutes of Health as part of the federal government’s response to alleged Title VI infractions at Columbia. Although Columbia is considered the primary recipient of this grant, 90 percent of the funds were being spent outside of Columbia through subcontracts to 30 Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study centers located in 21 states. However, as the central financial grantee, only Columbia can appeal the termination of the grant, and to date, it has been reluctant to do so. Without funding, the DPPOS, which is almost 30 years old, will die.

and continues:

Since March 10, the DPPOS leadership has sought to have the funding restored by highlighting our innocent bystander status in the press and appealing to members of the Congressional Diabetes Caucus, the largest caucus in Congress. Thus far, Columbia has not submitted a formal appeal of the termination to the NIH on our behalf; instead, it has required us to wait while it negotiates a University wide appeal. Unfortunately, this places our study in grave peril. Staff at the 30 clinical sites are already being laid off, and clinics are preparing to close.

The failure of Columbia to file a timely appeal on behalf of the DPPOS is damaging the DPPOS infrastructure irreversibly. We cannot wait any longer to submit the appeal, which may be our only hope. Further, Columbia has prevented us from submitting an application to the NIH for a supplement that would allow us to conduct an orderly close-out, protect the data, and honorably conclude the relationship with study participants. The loss of the DPPOS would mean that important public health questions related to diabetes and dementia may never be answered: the almost 30 years of data it has collected from its 1,700 current participants is unique and cannot be replicated.

I was shocked when I first found out that the trustees were refusing to go to court to challenge the illegal funding cancellations by a new administration that was trying out the exercise of dictatorial powers. The details explained here of the ongoing implications of their decision are appalling. This decision needs to be immediately reversed, although waiting two months to do anything may turn out to have had a huge destructive effect on important biomedical research.

In contrast to what is happening at Columbia, the news from elsewhere about what happens when illegal actions of our new dictator our challenged has been encouraging. Mohsen Mahdawi’s lawyers won his release from jail. The law firm Perkins Coie conclusively won its case. The state of Maine won its case and got its funding back.

Why are the Columbia trustees refusing to go to court and to appeal the illegal funding cancellations???? All I’m hearing publicly from them is the ridiculous claim that Trump is negotiating “in good faith”, and privately that many people involved in this think this is a good opportunity to make changes they favor.

Update: The trustees have announced that Jeh Johnson will be the new co-chair. Johnson has been at Paul Weiss, the first law firm to cave-in to Trump on March 20, the day before the March 21 Columbia cave-in (he says he will be retiring from his position at that firm).

Update: Rise Up, Columbia reminds me I should have linked to this New York Times story, which explains that law firms are finding out that caving-in may not be good for business. They also have this from a partner at one of the law firms fighting Trump:

If Trump came into your kitchen and said, “Take out the garbage,” you wouldn’t say, “OK, I was going to take it out anyway.” You’d say, “Get the fuck out of my kitchen!”

Of course, there are other possibilities. You might like having Donald Trump in your kitchen. If you’re in an ongoing battle with your spouse over who how to deal with the garbage, and Trump is on your side in this fight, you might be fine with having him there to make your spouse cave-in.