A Draft Executive Order Could Give OMB a Veto Over NIH Grants. Congress Already Paused This Idea.

A draft executive order could give the White House budget office a veto over NIH grants, according to reporting by The New York Times and Politico. The order has not been signed. But if it is, Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought, who has said publicly that he wants federal bureaucrats to be “traumatically affected,” would sit on a board with the power to block grants that have already passed scientific review.

What the Draft Order Would Do

As reported, the draft order would create a board that must approve NIH grants. The OMB Director and the NIH Director would sit on it, and its decisions would have to be unanimous. In practice, that means a single “no” from the budget director could stop a grant that scientists had already reviewed and recommended.

Congress Already Paused This Idea

Congress has already acted on a closely related proposal. Section 157 of the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2027, the stopgap funding law, bars OMB from finalizing its rule requiring political sign-off on grants, or any rule that is substantially similar, through December 11.

The White House could argue that an executive order is not a “rule” and falls outside that restriction. But Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins has written to Vought that the draft order looks like exactly what Congress blocked. She also pointed to the peer review process that federal law requires for NIH grants, found at 42 U.S.C. § 289a. A veto layered on top of peer review does not repeal that requirement. Under the draft, the scientists would still vote first; the budget director would simply vote last.

The Money Question: Impoundment

There is also a spending problem. If vetoed grants leave money that Congress appropriated unspent, that raises concerns under the Impoundment Control Act. This is not a new issue for NIH. In GAO decision B-337203 (August 5, 2025), the Government Accountability Office found that last year's NIH funding holdback violated the Impoundment Control Act.

For its part, NIH's spokesperson has said that every grant dollar will be spent. That is a public commitment worth remembering if spending patterns change.

Why Congress, Not the Courts, May Be the Faster Path

Researchers and NIH employees should not count on litigation to resolve this quickly. Last year, the Supreme Court allowed NIH grant cuts to proceed. That makes the December 11 funding deadline especially important. Congress can extend the current pause and make clear that it covers executive orders as well as rules.

What This Means for Federal Employees and Researchers

• Nothing has changed yet. The order is a draft, and the current funding law's pause on OMB's grant sign-off rule runs through December 11.
• If you work on grants at NIH or another agency, keep careful records of how grant decisions are made and communicated, especially any decision that departs from peer review recommendations.
• If you want the pause extended, you can contact your own members of Congress. Do it on your own time and with your own device, not government equipment.

Policy fights like this land on real people: the employees who run grant programs and the scientists who depend on them. To stay on top of what agencies tell Congress compared with what they actually do, sign up for our free newsletter.

Legal Disclaimer: This content is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Federal employment situations are fact-specific and time-sensitive. Please consult a qualified federal employment attorney about your specific situation. You can contact Southworth PC at attorneysforfederalemployees.com.