Scientific research, school budgets under attack

Following President Donald Trump’s directive in January to temporarily freeze certain federal aid to states and agencies (an effort that has since been halted by a federal judge), the administration moved to cut another source of key funding, reports CalMatters’ Mikhail Zinshteyn.

On Monday the National Institutes of Health planned to enact its new policy to limit funds that it provides universities across the U.S. for scientific research to 15% — about half the average rate research campuses currently receive. 

Though the money doesn’t fund specific research, it’s vital for institutions so they can maintain labs, pay for administrative upkeep and support staffing costs. The NIH’s actions prompted California, along with 21 other states, to sue the Trump administration and a federal judge ruled Monday to block the policy change.

In 2023-24, the University of California received more than $2 billion from the NIH for research, and “in the last audited year,” the California State University received $158 million, according to the lawsuit. The suit also argues that the cap is “arbitrary and capricious,” and infringes on Congress’ authority to oversee how institutes can use the money.

• Michael Drake, the president of the UC, which supports the lawsuit: “This is not only an attack on science, but on America’s health writ large. We must stand up against this harmful, misguided action.”

More money woes: In addition to Trump limiting federal research money, Gov. Gavin Newsom has proposed slashing $375 million from Cal State’s budget, writes Mikhail. 

The country’s largest public four-year university system has already been struggling with budget shortfalls due to rising labor costs, greater student needs and a drop in enrollment after the pandemic. Newsom’s plan would be a nearly 8% cut from the system’s budget, which could lead to Cal State laying off professors, nixing academic programs and canceling degree programs.

This is already happening at some campuses, including San Francisco State and Sonoma State.

Read more about the NIH’s funding cap and Cal State’s budget issues in Mikhail’s stories.

Proposition 36, which supporters said would curb crime by increasing penalties for certain drug and theft offenses, took effect nearly two months ago. But how well is it being enforced so far?

As CalMatters’ Cayla Mihalovich explains, certain crimes under Prop. 36 are no longer considered a misdemeanor, but rather a “treatment-mandated felony,” and offenders could either choose treatment or serve time in prison. But as more people are being charged with this new felony, counties lack the funding and resources for the treatment the law is supposed to provide.

As of Feb. 7, about 30 people have been charged with the treatment-mandated felony in Yolo County; roughly 130 people in Stanislaus County; and more than 500 people in Orange County. But preliminary findings show that only a handful of people have been placed in treatment.

Prop. 36 also calls for a drug addiction expert to perform evaluations. In Yolo County, for example, three people have requested treatment evaluations. But none have been conducted as of Feb. 3 because no agency has the resources, according to the county’s director of Health and Human Services Department.

Republican legislators who backed the measure have been calling for more dedicated Prop. 36 funding, which the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office estimated could cost tens to hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

Read more here.

As the Trump administration continues to ramp up immigration enforcement, one major talking point from Trump is that his mass deportations will target criminals and violent offenders. 

But immigrants with no criminal records are also being caught in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s dragnet: From Jan. 20 through Feb. 2, less than half of the roughly 8,200 people arrested had criminal convictions, according to ProPublica and The Texas Tribune.

Speaking with deportees and family members, CalMatters’ Wendy Fry delved into four recent deportations from California, including that of Joel Jacuinde. His wife, Estefany Peña, said her husband came to the U.S. legally in 1999 and has a green card. After coming into a San Francisco immigration office for a January check-in, Peña said Jacuinde was told he was not free to leave, and that agents pressured him to sign a voluntary removal form. Since then, Jacuinde has not returned home.

Peña said she supported Trump’s reelection and “thought they were going to be targeting criminals.”

• Peña: “No one mentioned during the campaigning of Donald Trump that residents … legal residents … were going to have to go through this.”

A spokesperson for ICE’s Los Angeles office said “ICE’s enforcement resources are based on intelligence-driven leads.”

Read more here.

In the aftermath of the Southern California fires, Cal Fire is updating its fire-hazard maps. Find out how many acres of the state’s locally managed lands are classified as having the highest level of fire hazards from CalMatters’ Julie Cart.