The lawsuits allege discriminatory practices in the renewal process for prestigious Investigator Awards, indicating potential systemic bias against Asian American women and older female scientists. Such practices, if true, reflect problematic labor relations and human rights practices by failing to provide equitable opportunities, reinforcing patterns of marginalization and bias.

Howard Hughes Medical Institute faces race, sex bias lawsuits by two Asian American biologists | Science | AAAS

HHMI's decision to cancel a major $60-million initiative designed to boost diversity in science undermines efforts to support marginalized communities and inclusive practices. This move, occurring in the context of Trump’s anti-DEI orders, represents a retreat from progressive commitments expected from a leading biomedical research funder.

Have Trump’s anti-DEI orders hit private funders? HHMI halts inclusive science programme

The decision to cancel a well-funded DEI program undermines ethical responsibility and long-term commitments to diversity and inclusion, which are essential to supporting marginalized communities and countering authoritarian tendencies.

HHMI abruptly cancels program to make science more inclusive - STAT

The OpenSecrets profile reveals that HHMI has not engaged in lobbying on specific bills in 2024, which implies a limited direct involvement in partisan or potentially authoritarian political influence. This restraint is viewed positively from an anti-authoritarian perspective, as it avoids channeling resources toward lobbying efforts that could be exploited by far‐right or authoritarian agendas.

Howard Hughes Medical Institute Profile: Lobbying • OpenSecrets

Although lobbying is generally a tool for political influence, HHMI’s modest spend of $40,000 appears directed toward safeguarding science funding and evidence-based policy rather than serving narrow corporate interests. Its transparent approach in this domain is viewed as aligning with progressive and anti-authoritarian values.

Howard Hughes Medical Institute Lobbying Profile • OpenSecrets

The trial centers on allegations that HHMI engaged in discriminatory practices against a disabled scientist by allegedly discouraging a renewal application on the basis of her disability. This incident highlights serious issues in labor relations and human rights practices, particularly in a sector that claims commitment to diversity. Despite previous investments in diversity and inclusion, the failure to track or support disabled scientists in a concrete way reflects a significant flaw, warranting a strong negative score.

Trial puts Howard Hughes Medical Institute—and disabled scientists—in the spotlight | Science | AAAS

The lawsuit alleges that HHMI's decision not to renew funding for a disabled researcher—purportedly due to a decline in research caliber—is indicative of discriminatory practices against someone with a disability. Such actions undermine fair labor and human rights practices and contribute negatively to the organization's commitment to equitable treatment.

Disability lawsuit lands Howard Hughes Medical Institute in court - Nature

HHMI is accused of discriminating against a disabled researcher by not renewing her contract following a disability diagnosis. This action, which appears to disregard the principles of equity and accommodation, reflects poorly on labor relations and human rights practices. Such discrimination undermines diversity efforts and worker protections in a sector that should champion inclusive practices.

Discrimination Lawsuit Against Top Research Institution Moves Forward