DOJ Investigates Group Linked to Reid Hoffman Over E. Jean Carroll Lawsuit Funding 
Baltic Drone Incidents Raise NATO Security Concerns 
Trump Administration Threatens Newark Airport International Travel Shutdown Over Immigration Dispute 
US Approves $108 Million Hawk Missile System Support Package for Ukraine 
Netanyahu Orders Expansion of Israeli Control in Gaza to 70% 
U.S. Sanctions Tanzanian Police Official Over Human Rights Violations 
FTC Antitrust Probe Targets Arm Holdings Over Chip Licensing Practices 
Venezuela to Release 300 Prisoners Amid Ongoing Human Rights Debate 
U.S. Sanctions Iran’s Strait of Hormuz Authority as Global Oil Markets Face Turmoil 
China Expands Nuclear Defense Network in Remote Desert 
EU Antitrust Probe Could Lead to Massive Google Fine Under DMA Rules 
Judge Dismisses Trump Administration Lawsuit Against Boston Sanctuary City Policy 
Trump Administration Weighs Halting International Flights at Sanctuary City Airports 
US-Iran Ceasefire Extension Near as Strait of Hormuz Shipping Deal Advances 
U.S.-China Taiwan Conflict Could Trigger Nuclear Escalation, IISS Warns 
The Trump administration has removed all members of the National Science Board, a major advisory group that oversees the National Science Foundation (NSF), according to statements from two former board members. The decision impacts more than 20 experts and has raised concerns about the future of independent scientific governance in the United States.
The National Science Board, established in 1950, plays a vital role in guiding U.S. science and engineering policy. Its members are typically appointed for six-year terms and come from diverse backgrounds, including academia, industry, nonprofits, and national laboratories. The board also advises both the president and Congress on key issues related to scientific research and innovation.
Yolanda Gil of the University of Southern California and Keivan Stassun of Vanderbilt University confirmed that all 22 members received an email on Friday notifying them of their immediate termination. Both stated that no reason was provided for the sudden dismissal. Gil highlighted the board’s diverse expertise, while Stassun noted that, although disappointing, the move was not entirely unexpected.
Experts believe the action reflects a broader strategy by the Trump administration, which began in early 2025, to reshape independent institutions. Critics argue that removing experienced board members and potentially replacing them with political allies could weaken objective scientific oversight and reduce critical input in policymaking.
The National Science Foundation referred questions to the White House. A White House official responded by suggesting that the board’s authority, established decades ago, may need to be updated. The official also emphasized that the NSF’s operations will continue without interruption.
This development has intensified discussions about the role of independent scientific bodies in the U.S., particularly their importance in ensuring unbiased, evidence-based policy decisions in science and technology.
