In this installment of her column "The Intersection," Keerthana Ramanathan (SOH '26) reflects on censorship of science by the federal government and parallels to 1950s McCarthyism.
Recently, a global alliance of civil society organizations called CIVICUS added the United States to a global watchlist, citing a narrowing state of civil rights. Although most people can still exercise their right to free speech and assembly, multiple attempts to violate rights, including mass arrests without evidence-based accusations, are occurring.
This climate seems to eerily echo a phenomenon of anti-communist propaganda in the 1950s: McCarthyism.
The term is making a comeback in the media in the face of concerns for decreasing civil liberties and free speech. Well before recent developments making President Donald Trump’s intentions clear, presidential historian Jon Meacham told NBC News that the parallel between Trump’s and McCarthy’s movements is “the clearest analogy we have.”
Senator Joseph McCarthy (R-Wis.), McCarthyism’s namesake, claimed in what is now considered an infamous speech that 205 internal federal employees were serving the Communist Party, saying that they were the enemy within.
From this speech grew McCarthyism. In numerous trials, McCarthy condemned political officials and accused numerous colleagues of being communists without evidence, often going as far as to exaggerate and distort the truth to achieve his ends. His actions instilled fear among the general public surrounding the expression of any ideas that referred even remotely to communism. Any and all criticism from the press was silenced.
These tactics seem to mimic that of President Donald Trump. Trump’s administration has fired public officials with the goal of ending diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and has arrested academics including Georgetown’s own Badar Khan Suri, whom the Trump administration accused of having ties to Hamas yet has not produced evidence beyond his free speech. Trump has also limited reporting access and seems to have focused goals of censoring the press. These efforts are driven by fear mongering, catering to extreme ideologies and claiming inaccuracies about the people and ideologies the administration seeks to repress.
This new era will have significant and possibly irreversible consequences for scientific discovery, as already evident in early instances of data censorship. 1,900 elected members of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine have already condemned this censorship in a recent open letter.
Science thrives on scrutiny. Censorship of medicine goes beyond suppressing facts — it extends to the stifling of access to information itself.
In the name of removing DEI, the Trump administration removed terminology relating to gender from several federal websites and entire datasets that scientists and the public rely on for information. By unilateral executive order, the administration has also tried to limit DEI processes in university admissions that seek to ensure equity in higher education. Even before Trump, disparities in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) fields were rampant; one can only imagine how much they may widen in the next few years as a result of these changes.
Scientists — including Wayne A. I. Frederick, the interim CEO of the American Cancer Society — have since called on the administration to restore access to this data. Several other medical groups have echoed this call, with a joint statement by leading physician groups warning the removal of crucial datasets and guidelines from federal websites will jeopardize patient care.
This censorship affects all types of science, according to a Silencing Science Tracker developed by the Columbia Climate School, which tracks government efforts to limit and censor scientific research and discussion. Attacks have included the elimination of the chief scientist of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and funding cuts to 91 ongoing research studies in the social sciences. Another particularly striking change has been a warning to scientists at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to remove references to mRNA vaccines from grant applications, lest they be flagged or rejected.
Censoring science doesn’t just affect research and is not just about politics: It’s about public health, conserving science advancement and protecting the liberties of the First Amendment to allow researchers to explore what they please.
Dissent matters. Government-imposed censorship and McCarthyist practices destroy meaningful thought, stifle creativity and curb scientific advancement. The current emergence of such practices seems to be forcing us down a path that looks eerily similar to McCarthy’s America.