Trump research grants canceled in blue states, filing says

A Department of Energy court filing says 284 Trump research grants canceled in 2025 were selected because the projects were tied to states that backed Kamala Harris and had two Democratic-caucusing senators.

The admission came in litigation brought by University of California researchers challenging the grant terminations. The New York Times first reported the filing.

Jeff Novak, the Energy Department’s principal deputy general counsel, wrote in the filing that more than 2,300 financial assistance awards across the department were reviewed, and 624 were marked either “termination” or “cancel.”

Of those, Novak said the Office of Management and Budget identified 284 grants in October 2025 for termination. With one exception, he wrote, the grants had a recipient location or at least one place where work would be performed in a state that gave its electoral votes to Harris in 2024 and had two Democratic-caucusing senators.

Why were the Trump research grants canceled?

Novak wrote that the decision to include the 284 grants in the October termination group was not based on program rules, legal requirements, cost savings or performance concerns. He said the Department of Energy “accepts” that the grants were chosen based only on the political identity of the recipient’s state, meaning whether it was a “Blue State” or not.

The filing also said the department would not argue that it examined downstream beneficiaries of the money to judge their political identity or geographic spread.

The other 340 grants that had been proposed for termination were not canceled in October 2025 or afterward, Novak wrote. He said those grants had a recipient location or place of performance in a state that voted for Trump in 2024 or had at least one Republican-caucusing senator.

How the Energy Department responded

The Energy Department disputed the idea that the court papers show political decision-making. Ben Dietderich, the department’s press secretary, said in a Friday statement that such a reading was a misrepresentation of the filing and Novak’s words.

“None of the termination decisions were based on political considerations,” Dietderich said, adding that Energy Secretary Chris Wright had addressed the issue in Capitol Hill briefings.

Wright also rejected the claim during a June appearance before the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. “No decisions were made on politics,” he said, according to the committee’s account of the hearing.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

What else was happening around the grants?

At the time of the October cancellations, Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought wrote on social media that nearly $8 billion in what he called “Green New Scam” funding tied to the left’s climate agenda was being canceled.

Vought named 16 states where projects were canceled, including California, New York, Colorado, Vermont and New Jersey.

The filing lands as the Office of Management and Budget has proposed a rule that would give political appointees more power over federal grants. The office says the rule would align grants with the sitting president’s priorities and improve oversight.

Under that proposal, political appointees could screen applications for whether they “promote anti-American values” and could end grants viewed as “no longer in the Federal Government’s interest.”

The Energy Department cancellations are part of a wider fight over federal funding under Trump’s second term. His administration has also canceled grants over references to DEI, frozen research funding at Harvard tied to allegations of antisemitism, and threatened to deny federal funds to states that resist his immigration policies, according to the reported actions described in the case and related coverage.

This story draws on original reporting from NBC News.