[strangeloops85]

This is disingenuous: there is no "DEI" component of NSF proposals. There is a Broader Impacts section which is mandated by law - the America Competes Act of 2010, which congress passed. https://www.congress.gov/111/plaws/publ358/PLAW-111publ358.p... It states that:

GOALS.—The Foundation shall apply a Broader Impacts Review Criterion to achieve the following goals: (1) Increased economic competitiveness of the United States. (2) Development of a globally competitive STEM workforce. (3) Increased participation of women and underrepresented minorities in STEM. (4) Increased partnerships between academia and industry. (5) Improved pre-K–12 STEM education and teacher development. (6) Improved undergraduate STEM education. (7) Increased public scientific literacy. (8) Increased national security.

That's it. I've won many NSF proposals and have never talked about DEI. Instead we talk about outreach work we do with local schools, our involving undergraduate students in research who would not otherwise be able to volunteer their time, and of course the economic impacts of working on these topics.

An executive order cannot override the law authorizing the National Science Foundation and its activities. We are, for now, a country of laws.

[chriskanan]

A recent Major Research Instrumentation proposal that I submitted to NSF had this required section in the Broader Impacts section [1], where I've pasted the text from the instructions:

Institutional Commitment to Diversity and Inclusion - Using no more than one paragraph, describe indicators of institutional commitment to promoting diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility (DEIA) within the awardee/subawardee institution(s).

[1] https://new.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/mri-major-research...

[jjtheblunt]

Is the item (3) what the parent comment refers to?

[strangeloops85]

Who knows? The executive orders read like they were written by children and don't clearly define what they mean by "DEIA". But NSF's authorization is from Congress. Unless congress passes a law rescinding this as a part of what counts as broader impacts, or the Supreme Court rules that increasing participation of underrepresented groups is unconstitutional (by precedent it is certainly not!), then NSF cannot simply change the definition of broader impacts.

[nickff]

NSF is an independent agency, and the degree of control over it which a President can legitimately exercise is disputed, but presidents from both parties have treated the independent agencies as being subject to executive orders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_agencies_of_the_Un...

[ahmeneeroe-v2]

Which article of the Constitution describes "independent agencies"? I'm only aware of: Executive, Legislative, Judicial, and State agencies.

[ineptech]

They're created by Congress but administratively part of the executive branch, as described in the first two paragraphs of the linked wiki article, and they're independent so they can be insulated from politics and regulate effectively.

[ahmeneeroe-v2]

I understand that, I just think that's extra-constitutional and shields these agencies from accountability

[nickff]

I believe that Independent Agencies were created by the Progressives of the early 20th century. They were subsequently found to be constitutional, through somewhat dubious reasoning, and it seems like they’re now too big to fail.

[ahmeneeroe-v2]

Thank you for the thoughtful response. Exactly what I was referring to, they are extra-Constitutional at best. And now the executive is rightfully taking them back under control

[gilbetron]

"independent agencies" isn't meant to be at the same level of the "Big Three", but rather agencies that are deliberately created by the Legislative branch (typically) to be as independent as the constitution allows. We don't need the president, congress, and the supreme court to vote/judge on every single decision that happens in this country. We create bodies to do that for us.

[EasyMark]

I will take the SCOTUS opinion on these laws being Constitutional over an comment on hackernews. We'll see what happens, I'm sure that Trumpy will try and get it to SCOTUS and test such institutions.

[ahmeneeroe-v2]

That's fair, I generally apply the same rule!

Wondering what your thoughts are on presidential immunity, gun control, and abortion decisions though. Corporate personhood? Civil asset forfeiture?