October 22, 2025 | This article will appear in Volume 61, Issue 3.
Since taking office in January of 2025, the second Trump Administration has carried out a series of legislative actions that continue to severely weaken our nation’s scientific infrastructure. They have employed both physical intimidation of university students and financial hostage-holding of institutions to force compliance with their policies. This has stalled scientific discovery, negatively impacted the trajectories of many mid- and late-career scientists, and likely devastated our nation’s pipeline of early career scientists. Despite years of warning signs that universities would be a major target of political action,1 the brazenness of this assault seemed to stun the scientific community. Understandably, these sudden attacks have left many scientists – including those organized in professional societies – without a clear plan of action.
To help guide a response in such unprecedented times, a survey was sent out to ASP membership before the annual meeting. The survey was intended to explore what role, if any, a professional society should play when science is under attack. The intention was to provide ASP leadership with these results so that they may better know the expectations of their membership and use this information to guide a robust response to these assaults.
In total, 156 ASP members responded to the survey. Roughly half (49.4%) were “mid-career” (any level professor, government, non-profit, or industry professional), 34% were “early career” (postdoc or earlier), and 16.7% were “late career” (professor emeritus, retired). Of the respondents, 80% work in the United States (US), while 19.2% work outside the US. People were prompted to respond to eight major statements. Results are presented below.
The survey was intended to explore what role,
if any, a professional society should play when science is under attack.
- Generally speaking, scientific infrastructure nationwide has been negatively impacted by the US government since January of 2025. This statement established that the majority of ASP membership (93%) who took the survey believe that government action has negatively impacted scientific infrastructure since the beginning of this year.
- Scientists nationwide have mounted an effective response to government attacks on science since January of 2025. Responses to this statement established that roughly 6 out of 10 ASP members (59%) did not think that scientists’ response to government attacks was adequate. Though, since many respondents remained “neutral,” only 14.1% of membership were satisfied with scientists’ response to government attacks.
- To the best of their capacity, ASP leadership (Pres/VP, Executive Committee, sub-committees) has mounted an effective response to government attacks on science since January of 2025. While a small percentage of respondents either agreed or disagreed with the statement, the majority (77.8%) were unaware of action taken by the ASP. Statements made by the outgoing president and several in leadership at the August 4th national meeting in Grand Rapids, MI acknowledged this and provided insight into previous Executive Committee discussions and plans to advocate for science and our membership in the future.
- To the best of their capacity, my PI/boss/supervisor has mounted an effective response to government attacks on science since January of 2025. When viewed at a more local level, nearly one-third of respondents supported action taken by their supervisors, while just under one-half were not aware of action taken. Results are slightly more concerning when combining two categories: 67.1% who took the survey either thought their supervisors have not mounted an effective response or they were not aware of any response. When combined with data from statement 3, respondents expressed little satisfaction with response on both national and local levels.
- To the best of my capacity, I have mounted an effective response to government attacks on science since January of 2025. When assessing response to government attacks on science from a personal standpoint, respondents were hardest on themselves, with 37.8% expressing disagreement with the statement.
- The ASP (Pres/VP, Executive Committee, DEI Committee) has effectively responded to government attacks on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion since January 2025. Similar results were recorded when assessing ASP leadership and sub-committee response to attacks on DEI, with 77.3% responding that either the ASP had not mounted an effective response or they were not aware of any response.
- I would like to see professional societies (such as ACS, ASMS, ASP, etc.) organize, lobby, and respond to government/public attacks on science. A strong majority of respondents (92.3%) indicated that they expect professional societies to mount a response to the current government assault on science. When these numbers are filtered to account for only “early career” scientists (n = 53), 96.2% agree or strongly agree with statement 7, while 3.8% remained neutral.
- In the future I would like to participate in and/or support an organized response to government / public attacks on science. A strong majority of 80.7% of respondents are ready to engage in advocacy for science. When these numbers are filtered to account for only “early career” scientists (n = 52), the percent increases 86.6%.
Discussion
These results provide ASP leadership with a clear mandate. Our membership is in strong agreement that 1) science is under attack and 2) professional societies bear responsibility for a clear and robust response. The encouraging take-away from this survey is that 80.7% of respondents are ready to take some form of action, while the future of the ASP, early career scientists, declared even more of a willingness to engage (86.6%). This call for action can surely be harnessed by leadership to inspire a series of creative responses that tap into the collective frustration and powerlessness felt by its membership.
However, the challenge for our leadership moving forward will be to walk a fine tightrope – to not expose the ASP to crippling government retaliation while simultaneously standing up for our most vulnerable populations who are being systematically excluded from the pipeline to careers in science.
Many successful resistance movements – women’s suffrage, civil rights, gay rights – share a common trait: all risked their well-being and status-quo in order to fight off the forces of patriarchy, racism, and bigotry. Our current fight to preserve free speech and the right to open scientific inquiry in the face of a democratically elected authoritarian figure is no different. The honest question we must ask as a professional society – and I pose this as someone who is not responsible for its maintenance, health, or survival – is “what are we willing to lose in the name of standing up for our principles?” 
Reference
- “The universities are the enemy.” J.D. Vance speech at National Conservatism Conference in 2021.