Astronomers and space scientists are living in a state of fear and anxiety as the Trump administration and Elon Musk-led U.S. DOGE Service target science spending and diversity initiatives with actions that are already damaging research and threaten to set back U.S. scientific leadership for years, scientists tell Astronomy.
The assault began during Trump’s first week in office with a series of executive orders and efforts by DOGE and allies at government personnel and budget offices directing a federal funding freeze, a purge of diversity programs from the civil services, and mass layoffs. The funding freeze was suspended by a court order in late January. But in practice, government grant evaluations remain in disarray as agencies scramble to comply with the executive orders. Researchers are not certain that approved grants will be disbursed, and certain spending methods remain effectively frozen.
Affected agencies include the National Science Foundation and NASA, which underwrite nearly all of U.S. astronomy. NASA has removed from its websites a variety of public data, including grant-reporting information. And many key NASA science advisory groups have spent most of Trump’s term suspended while the agency reviews their compliance with the executive orders. Some will be restructured, according to a NASA email reported March 12 by NASA Watch.
On March 10, NASA announced an initial round of job cuts, eliminating some two dozen positions in three different offices: the Office of the Chief Scientist; a Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) office; and the Office of Technology, Policy and Strategy. The announcement and internal emails were reported by outlets including SpaceNews.
Now, rumors are swirling that the White House may propose massive budget cuts to NASA science, as high as 50 percent. These have not been confirmed but are galvanizing opposition — and generating fear.
“There is a lot of stress and concern for friends and colleagues,” said one space researcher. (Scientists were granted anonymity for this story in order to speak freely; more than a dozen other scientists contacted for this story declined comment.) This researcher added that senior management and the legal and contracts offices at universities and research institutions “are spending a lot of time trying to understand how the blizzard of executive orders (which are sometimes rescinded, and often vague) will affect [institutions and projects] … Staff are expressing their fears for their jobs, and concerns for co-workers who may be members of groups that are being attacked by the White House.”
Introducing inefficiencies
The Trump administration argues it is trying to right-size a bloated federal bureaucracy. But many of the restrictions on research agencies and the scientists they fund have also led to “a terrible, inefficient waste of resources,” the researcher said. For instance, as the Lunar and Planetary Science conference convened in Houston this week, government employees, such as those at the Astrogeology branch of the U.S. Geological Survey, were banned from travel and forced to participate remotely. “So remote is OK for conference attendance but not for working from home?” the researcher asked rhetorically, referring to another Trump executive order mandating all federal employees return to in-person work.
The Trump administration has also effectively frozen government purchase cards — credit cards widely used by agencies to purchase supplies and equipment — by setting their spending limits to $1. “We’re trying to build spacecraft … and can’t buy anything,” said one space scientist who requested anonymity. “That’s really stupid shit.”
Casey Dreier, policy advocate for The Planetary Society, said that the administration’s anti-DEI orders have led to withdrawals from contracts and activities that bring students on to missions and into research, cutting off a valuable source of new talent.
One program that’s been halted is Here to Observe (H2O), which paired NASA mission teams with institutions with large numbers of students from underrepresented groups, bringing students into contact with NASA projects and mentors. H2O coordinators have had their funding cut off. This “really sucks,” said the second space researcher, who has volunteered as a mentor in the program. Eliminating the program threatens to cut off a valuable source of future scientists and devastates an innovative form of science education, they said.
A mental toll
Scientists say the chaos and upheaval of the past month has taken a mental toll.
As the first DOGE actions and executive orders got underway, says the second scientist, there was panic. They and colleagues across the country spent weekends and evenings “scrambling to know how to help,” including getting personal contact information from fellow researchers at government institutes in case their email addresses were cut off.
“I’m exhausted,” the researcher said. “People aren’t sleeping, they’re scared and stressed.” Space scientists are worried about other federal employees, other researchers and those in marginalized communities, they added. The researcher noted the irony of space scientists — “a community of troubleshooters” — not being able to “fix it.” “It’s really hard to watch,” and they are trying to find a balance “between staying informed and jumping off a cliff.”
“I’m really concerned about the survival of science in America,” the researcher said.
The other researcher described similar feelings. “We feel terrible for the people [at various agencies], all public servants dedicated to furthering our interests who have been treated so shabbily.”
Describing a “world upside down,” this researcher alternates among feeling “distracted [and] putting my head down and shouldering on because you can’t do anything about it.” The researcher has also called elected representatives because “we don’t want the U.S. to retreat in all these areas.”
An “extinction-level event” for space science
More challenges may loom for America’s space-science community, from astronomers to builders of space missions.
The Planetary Society last week issued a statement responding to media reports that the Trump administration’s proposed 2026 budget would cut the budget for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD) by 50 percent. Should that occur, Dreier said, it would be an “extinction-level event.”
The missions most at threat, said Dreier, are those in extended operations — spacecraft that have exceeded their design goals and continue to perform good science. These include the Voyager probes; the New Horizons spacecraft, which flew by Pluto in 2015 and continues to explore the Kuiper Belt; and the Hubble Space Telescope.
Funding for research is also vulnerable. About 25 percent of SMD’s budget goes to scientific research and grants, funding scientists and students across the country, according to Dreier.
NASA occupies about 0.4 percent of the federal discretionary budget. By the agency’s own accounting, every dollar it spends generates three dollars in the national economy, totaling $76 billion in economic impact in 2023, impacting all states, and supporting more than 300,000 jobs.
Dreier said the best thing concerned citizens can do to support NASA and space science is to contact the White House and your Congressional delegation, and urge the latter to reject the Trump administration’s proposed cuts.
“Say it frequently and passionately,” he said. “There’s nothing in the Constitution that says we have to do space science. It is a choice. If we elect not to it, it says something every sad about our society. Then we’ve lost a consensus in the role of public investment in science.”
That investment is critical not only economically but also because, as a species, he adds, we are curious and ask big questions. “You need something to put on the rockets, up and out, to look for something new. If we don’t do it as a society, then it just won’t happen.”
Other analysts have raised concerns that possible NASA cuts could imperil the Artemis program and its plans to return humans to the Moon. The program has already suffered numerous cost overruns and delays. Last December, the Artemis 2 crewed lunar fly-by was officially delayed until 2026, and the Artemis 3 landing until 2027.
The Artemis program is built around the embattled Space Launch System (SLS) heavy-lift rocket to get crews to lunar orbit, with landers built by SpaceX (a variant of its Starship upper stage) and Blue Origin. As part of NASA’s “Moon to-Mars” approach, Artemis involves international partners to steadily build technology and expertise for the far more difficult and dangerous trip to Mars.
However, Elon Musk has criticized Artemis and called going to the Moon “a distraction” from going to Mars. President Trump has also pledged in multiple speeches to send Americans to Mars. This has led to speculation that Artemis could be scaled down and SLS put on the chopping block.
SLS — a disposable rocket built with leftover engines and boosters from the space shuttle — has a checkered history of cost overruns and delays. But so far, it is the only heavy-lift vehicle that has successfully returned a human-rated craft from deep space. Proponents of SLS say that ditching it now would lead to further delays. SpaceX’s Starship has not yet attempted a full test flight that has returned to its launch tower, nor has it been rated for human crews. Its last two launches have ended in failures before it reached orbit.
The geopolitical implications also have raised alarms, including among Congressional Republicans, who worry that delaying Artemis — or cancelling it altogether — will cede the lunar south pole and its valuable water ice to China’s space program.
All in all, without significant changes to the current trajectory — which can be brought about with public pressure — Dreier sees “a very dismal path forward for NASA and [space] science.”
Christopher Cokinos writes frequently for Astronomy and is the author of Still as Bright: An Illuminating History of the Moon from Antiquity to Tomorrow.
