A federal judge once again blocked the National Institutes of Health from moving forward with its plans to cap reimbursements for costs indirectly related to research—a measure that would have cost colleges at least $4.3 billion. 

The plan, first announced Feb. 7, has been on hold since Feb. 10 after the judge issued and then extended a temporary restraining order—an emergency measure that kept the status quo in place until the court could address the matter. NIH officials had proposed capping indirect expenses at 15 percent of the direct research costs—down from the average of 28 percent. Indirect costs pay for laboratory space and hazardous waste removal, among other expenses associated with research projects. 

After a hearing late last month about the proposal, U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley from the District of Massachusetts ruled Wednesday that the plan was contrary to law and that the NIH failed to provide any sufficient reasoning, rationale or justification for the change. She also criticized NIH for not considering colleges and other parties’ “reliance interests,” rendering the policy “arbitrary and capricious.” Additionally, the change would cause irreparable harm, she said, citing numerous court filings from university officials.

“The first, and most pressing, irreparable harm is the suspension of ongoing research and risk to patients’ lives,” wrote Kelley in a 76-page opinion. “The lives that will certainly be lost from a pause in these trials cannot be replaced. That is not an opinion of the Court—that is the belief put forth by dozens of declarants who represent universities, research institutions, and associations whose very goals are to protect the sanctity of human life and science.”

Three different groups of plaintiffs sued the Trump administration over the plan, including 22 attorneys general, medical schools and associations representing research universities. They warned in court filings that the rate cut would mean layoffs and hamper university budgets, local economies and medical breakthroughs. Lawyers for NIH argued at the hearing that destabilizing university budgets doesn’t amount to immediate and permanent harm.

But Kelley disagreed. 

“The cut undermines the universities’ and institutions’ ability to drive medical breakthrough that benefits public health and contributes to national advancement in science,” she wrote. “Once that is lost, it can almost certainly never be regained. No dollar amount can be placed on the value of the United States remaining the world leader in research and medical advancement.”