National Science Foundation Sued Over Plan to Close Social Science Unit

A coalition of America’s leading scientific societies and two Massachusetts researchers sued in federal court in Boston on Monday, November 9, 2026, to stop the National Science Foundation closing the directorate that funds most US basic research into how people think, behave and organise society. The National Science Foundation lawsuit says the planned shutdown of the Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences (SBE) is unlawful: Congress directed the agency to support social science research, and its rules required consulting the National Science Board before eliminating a division. The board was never consulted — and three weeks later, President Donald Trump fired all its members.

Key Points

• Scientists sued on Monday, November 9, 2026, in federal court in Boston, asking a judge to block the closure of the foundation’s social science directorate before it takes effect at year end.
• The plaintiffs are the Federation of Associations in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, the Society of Experimental Social Psychology and the Social and Affective Neuroscience Society, plus two Massachusetts researchers, represented by Democracy Forward.
• SBE funds roughly two-thirds of all federally funded basic academic research in the social, behavioural and economic sciences in the United States.
• The foundation announced in April 2026 it would close the directorate by year end, without consulting the 25-member National Science Board, whose members President Donald Trump fired three weeks later.
• The case could decide the future of more than $1 billion in intended research funding, and follows an October 30 class-action suit by three California State University researchers over terminated grants.

What Happened

The complaint, Federation of Associations in Behavioral & Brain Sciences et al. v. National Science Foundation, asks the court to stop the closure outright. The plaintiffs say the foundation moved to dismantle an entire directorate without legal authority and without any public explanation.

The foundation says the directorate has not shut down while it implements administration priorities, and plans to transfer continuing grants and staff elsewhere. The plaintiffs say funding opportunities have already halted — and if the directorate closes at year end, grants will be cancelled and research teams scattered long before any judge rules on whether the closure was legal.

Background and Context

SBE is the part of the foundation that pays for basic research into human behaviour and society — psychology, neuroscience, sociology, linguistics, economics and statistics. It funds about two-thirds of all federally funded basic academic research in those fields in the United States.

The directorate came under threat in April 2026, when the foundation announced it would close SBE by year end as part of the administration’s wider reshaping of federal science funding. Under its governing statute, the 25-member National Science Board sets agency policy, and the director may only eliminate a division in consultation with the board. The suit says the board was never consulted, was shut out of major overhaul decisions, and was then fired in full by the president. On October 30, three California State University researchers filed a separate class-action suit over terminated foundation grants.

The National Science Foundation Lawsuit: What the Complaint Argues

The complaint rests on two pillars. The first is Congress: the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 directs the foundation to support basic research in the social sciences alongside the physical and biological sciences, and later laws required certain research to be supported “through the Directorate of Social, Behavioral & Economic Sciences.” The suit says the closure violates those obligations and congressional limits on cuts to the directorate’s budget.

The second is the board: the foundation’s leadership failed to consult the National Science Board about closing SBE and shut it out of major decisions — then the president fired the whole board. A body meant to check structural changes was removed before it could object. The plaintiffs ask the court to preserve the directorate, and the $1 billion-plus in research funds tied to it, while the case is decided.

Reactions and Quotes

The scientific societies behind the suit framed the closure as an attack on research the public relies on, not an internal budget decision. “The administration’s proposal to eliminate SBE is a disservice to the American public and a crushing blow to the behavioral and brain sciences,” said Juliane Baron, executive director of the Federation of Associations in Behavioral and Brain Sciences. “We can’t solve pressing societal challenges without understanding humans.”

Jon Freeman, a board member of the federation and professor of psychology at Columbia University, was blunter: “We cannot allow this administration to shoot America in the foot. It’s scientific self-sabotage, and the American public will ultimately pay the price in the discoveries never made and lives never changed for the better.”

Skye Perryman, president and chief executive of Democracy Forward, which represents the plaintiffs, said the case was about legality as much as science. “The administration’s dismantling of SBE is not only reckless; it is illegal,” she said. “NSF provided no public explanation for its decision to close the Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences Directorate.”

Why It Matters

SBE-funded research helped shape Google’s search technologies, improve eyewitness identification, develop life-saving organ-donor matching, increase retirement savings and lay the foundations for modern artificial intelligence. Nobody can say in advance which study yields the next breakthrough — which is why cutting a whole field is so costly.

The stakes are also human: the directorate supports researchers, graduate students and early-career scientists whose careers depend on federal grants. If funding vanishes, the plaintiffs warn, talent will leave the field — or the country — and the loss will compound for decades. The fight is part of a wider pattern of federal programmes being reshaped by funding decisions and of court battles testing the administration’s power. For more science coverage, see our science section.

What Happens Next

The Boston court will first decide whether to block the closure while the case is heard — a decision that matters because the foundation says SBE closes by year end, only weeks away. If the court declines, the plaintiffs warn, little may be left to save by the time of a final ruling. The parallel grants suit continues, and the new Congress, seated in January after the November 3 midterms, controls the foundation’s budget and could revisit the limits on cuts. For now the fight is in the courtroom.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the SBE directorate?
The part of the National Science Foundation funding basic research in psychology, neuroscience, sociology, linguistics, economics and statistics.

Why is the National Science Foundation closing it?
The foundation announced in April 2026 it would close the directorate by year end as it implements administration priorities, giving no detailed public explanation.

What does the lawsuit ask the court to do?
Stop the closure: it violates the 1950 Act and later laws, and the National Science Board was never consulted.

Has the directorate already closed?
No. The foundation says it has not shut down and plans to transfer grants and staff elsewhere; the plaintiffs say funding opportunities have already halted.

What happens to existing grants if SBE closes?
The foundation says continuing grants would transfer elsewhere in the agency. The plaintiffs warn the move would still disrupt research, with more than $1 billion at stake.