Below the start of an editorial in Nature.com, linked through today's daily news summary by Carbon Brief.
"One month has passed since the start of Donald Trump’s second US presidency. In a letter to the incoming president, Nature urged Trump and his administration to build on the nation’s legacy and achievements in science, and further boost research for the sake of prosperity and security (Nature 637, 517; 2025).
"The administration has chosen the opposite path, launching an unprecedented assault on science, on research institutions and on vital international organizations and initiatives.
"Almost immediately after being sworn in as president on 20 January, Trump put his signature to piles of executive orders cancelling or freezing tens of billions of dollars in funding for research and international assistance, and putting the seal on thousands of lay-offs.
"Orwellian restrictions have been placed on research, including bans on studies that mention particular words relating to sex and gender, race, disability and other protected characteristics.
"Federal agencies and universities are in turmoil. Thousands of researchers are in limbo as they wait for a thaw on a highly questionable funding freeze. And around the world, millions of grant recipients of US assistance programmes have been abandoned.
"It is hard to put into words the extent of the damage being done to the US research enterprise, which is of almost incalculable value to both the nation itself and the wider world.
"Organizations representing the global scientific communities are beginning to react. More need to speak out in support of their US colleagues. The US scientific and educational communities must know that they are not alone.
"An assault on science and scientists anywhere is an assault on science and scientists everywhere.
"Individuals and organizations are challenging some of the Trump administration’s actions in the courts, and it might be that the White House is forced to moderate or reverse some of its decisions.
"But the direction of travel is clear: there is a desire to downgrade, if not eliminate, independent, science-based evidence and expert advice; there is also a rank disregard for international agreements."
