Shutting Down Science’s Council: A New Trend

In a surprising move, President Trump terminated the tenure of several scientists on the National Science Board (NSB)—the independent body that steers the nation’s $9 billion basic science agency. The dismissal arrived via a terse White House email, thanking them for service and ending their terms immediately.

The NSB was established in 1950 to bring board‑style oversight to the National Science Foundation (NSF), which funds research from Antarctic stations to cutting‑edge labs. The board normally consists of 25 scientists and engineers chosen by the president, each serving a six‑year term so policy shifts do not erase scientific guidance overnight.

“Six years lets you do real work beyond politics,” said former member Marvi Matos Rodriguez, who was working on an 80‑page report while juggling her day job. She emphasized how long terms insulate science from short‑term agendas.

The exact number of removals remains unclear, and it is unknown whether new members will be appointed. An NSF spokesperson directed questions to the White House, which has yet to comment on why the terminations occurred.

Keivan Stassun, a Vanderbilt physicist who joined in 2022, reported that about one third of the board received similar termination notices. He stressed that the NSB’s role is to keep NSF decisions rigorous and scientifically sound, especially when large funding choices—such as a new research vessel—are on the table.

Last year, the Trump administration proposed slashing NSF’s budget by 55 percent in its fiscal‑year request, a cut that Congress rejected. Now the budget again shows deep cuts for FY 2027, prompting Stassun to question whether the board’s advisory work is being targeted by the administration.

Congressional leaders have called the move “stupid” and a continuation of a pattern where the administration has repeatedly disrupted science advisory bodies. Similar shake‑ups have occurred in other federal agencies: a vaccine committee was wiped out and replaced with skeptics, an autism advisory board was reshaped to include those who spread misinformation, and NIH review panels lost many Black or Hispanic experts.

The NSB’s disruption adds to the turmoil facing the NSF, which last year canceled over 1,000 active research grants. While Trump nominated Jim O’Neill for NSF director in March, he has yet to be confirmed by Congress. The board’s future—and the stability of U.S. science policy—remains uncertain.