Scientists, Feeling Under Siege, March Against Trump Policies

In a striking show of solidarity, thousands of scientists and their allies marched across the United States and globally on March 7, 2025, protesting what they see as a relentless attack on science by the Trump administration. Dubbed “Stand Up for Science,” these demonstrations responded to a flurry of executive actions, budget cuts, and policy shifts enacted shortly after President Donald Trump’s second-term inauguration. For many in the scientific community, these measures signal a dire threat to research, public health, and environmental safeguards.

The Trigger: A Wave of Anti-Science Policies

The protests erupted following a series of aggressive moves by the Trump administration targeting federal science agencies. Within weeks of taking office, Trump froze grants from key funders, halted federal research payments, and purged climate change references from government websites. Public access to vital datasets on health, environment, and climate was restricted, while mass layoffs stripped specialized expertise from agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Scientists viewed these steps as a calculated effort to sideline evidence in favor of political agendas.

Beyond funding, a “climate of fear” emerged. Researchers reported their work being politicized—grants were canceled or scrutinized for terms like “women,” “diversity,” or “transgender.” At the National Institutes of Health (NIH), projects on transgender health and diversity were axed, while the National Science Foundation (NSF) faced reviews of grants with “controversial” keywords. The EPA and NOAA saw hundreds of probationary staff fired and critical facilities, like volcano observatories in Alaska and Hawaii, slated for closure.

Voices from the Frontlines

The protests, spearheaded by early-career scientists and graduate students, swelled into a nationwide movement, with rallies in over 30 U.S. cities—Washington, D.C., Boston, Denver, Seattle, and New York among them—and solidarity events abroad, including in France. At the Lincoln Memorial in D.C., an estimated 2,000 attendees heard from luminaries like former NIH Director Francis Collins and astronomer Phil Plait.

Signs at the rallies bore messages like “Science is the vaccine for ignorance” and “In evidence we trust.” Some took aim at Elon Musk’s influence via the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), with slogans like “Edit Elon out of USA’s DNA.” Protesters decried not just budget slashes but the broader fallout—stifled innovation, delayed medical breakthroughs, and worsened climate crises.

Francis Collins underscored the stakes: “These projects weren’t just data points on a spreadsheet. These were projects designed to reach people who have long been excluded from health care and research. Canceling them isn’t just bad policy; it’s harmful to real people.”

The Administration’s Defense

The Trump administration framed its actions as fiscal responsibility. White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers claimed the measures aimed to “slash waste, fraud, and abuse while increasing transparency of taxpayer spending.” She argued that diverting funds from “diversity-oriented projects” would bolster “legitimate scientific research.” Supporters echoed this, casting the cuts as a necessary realignment of federal priorities.

A Scientific Rebuttal

The scientific community rejected these justifications. Researchers warned of lasting damage—lost expertise, halted studies, and weakened public health responses. At the EPA, scientists alleged their work was being suppressed to favor polluters, a charge backed by a dissent letter from over 170 staff. Globally, peers in France and beyond feared U.S. policies would disrupt international collaboration on climate and disease research.

An anonymous federal scientist studying infectious diseases summed up the frustration: “I cannot do my job right now,” citing budget cuts and bureaucratic hurdles.

Looking Ahead

The protests’ impact is uncertain. They’ve spotlighted science’s societal role and rallied a community, but the administration shows no sign of retreat, bolstered by a Republican-led Congress. Still, figures like Phil Plait remain defiant, recalling past wins against anti-science foes: “We have taken them on.”

For now, these marches stand as both a cry of resistance and a call to protect evidence-based policy. Whether they spark change or remain symbolic, the scientific community’s message rings loud: they will not go quietly.