In a report for the Union of Concerned Scientists (August 18, 2026), Cornell University Associate Professor J. Matias points to the prevailing threats from the US State Department to the scientific community. Merely publishing findings can lead to researchers being fired, demoted, detained, and/or deported. While the Trump administration was recently blocked from enforcing its unconstitutional policy of censorship at the border, the impact is impacting the fundamental freedom required of scientific inquiry. Matias reports:
“The lawsuit and public statements respond to the federal government’s attempts to control science by controlling the flow of researchers. In May 2025, the State Department announced a policy of excluding noncitizens who study misinformation, fact-checking, content moderation, and regulatory compliance in the technology industry. The policies were later expanded to include deportation. Such restrictions are similar in spirit to policies in China and other countries that selectively vet scholars for overseas travel based on the content of their research.
This censorship-by-visa scheme also affects the technology industry by preventing safety teams from international travel…
The most pervasive effects of censorship hijack fair institutional rules to enlist organizations as unwitting accomplices. Both academia and industry are hierarchies of scarcity that frequently review people’s records when deciding who to hire, promote, and recognize. When one person looks less productive on paper, they are sometimes passed over in favor of someone who has more grants, publications, or other accomplishments. Under systems of intimidation and fear, seemingly impartial processes will tend to reward whoever is least targeted by censorship. When cohorts of leaders are filled with people who were lucky, clueless, or compliers, the fruit of intimidation can last a generation.”
How can science remain resilient in the face of this intimidation? What can individuals and institutions do to continue their essential work?
“Leaders can use our voices, our networks, resources, and power to redirect the inertia that turns us into unwitting accomplices. Often simple acts like speaking up in a hiring or promotion meeting can reorient key decisions away from the gravity of censorship into a better orbit. We can also organize our fields to enable people to contribute equitably even when they face government restrictions. When we design our teams and conferences for remote, secure participation at the core, our fields will also protect the environment and become more inclusive of people with disabilities.
Individuals can build resilience among our peers by educating ourselves and by championing the careers of people affected by government threats. Because censorship works through peer effects and field level selection, we are most effective when we work together.”
Image: The Washington Post