NASA Science Missions Face Major Cuts Under New Trump Budget Blueprint

Last Thursday, the White House Office of Management and Budget handed NASA its vision for its initial budget request for the fiscal year 2026. According to the document obtained, the Trump administration plans to cut NASA’s overall budget by 20 percent next year. Simultaneously, the agency’s science programmes will be cut by 50 percent.

NASA Budget Proposal 2026: A Threat To Space Science?

As expected, the Trump administration’s plans for NASA include some significant reshuffling.

This includes the intention to move parts of the space agency’s headquarters to field centres nationwide.

The most radical proposals, however, have been those related to budget allocation. The preliminary version of the White House budget request calls for a nearly 20 per cent cut in the overall space agency budget. This amounts to about $5 billion.

The Science Mission Directorate will be most affected by the cuts. Its funding was cut by almost 50 per cent. This will affect everything related to planetary sciences, Earth sciences, astrophysical research, etc.

NASA Budget Cuts: Who Will Be Hit Hardest?

Only about 30 per cent of NASA’s roughly $25 billion budget is allocated to science. For the fiscal year 2024, that was $7.4 billion.

According to the Trump administration’s 2026 budget request, the astrophysics budget has been hit hard, dropping from about $1.5 billion to $487 million. Planetary science would drop from $2.7 billion to $1.9 billion, and earth science would drop from about $2.2 billion to $1.033 billion.

This could lead to cancelling programs already in development or currently in space.

‘Passback supports the continued operation of the Hubble and James Webb Space Telescopes and assumes that other telescopes will not be funded,’ the document states.

First and foremost, the cuts would bury the long-awaited Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, an observatory considered on par with those two world-class instruments, which is already fully assembled and has a budget for launch in two years.

Other significant cuts include ending the Mars Sample Return funding and the DAVINCI mission to Venus. Budget cuts also aim to force the closure of the Goddard Space Flight Centre in Maryland, where the agency employs 10,000 government employees and contractors.

Debate Over The Future Of NASA’s Science Missions

The preliminary version of President Donald Trump’s budget proposal to Congress is called a ‘passback’.

This document outlines the administration’s budget priorities and serves as a starting point for negotiations with Congress, which ultimately sets funding levels.

In other words, the President sets the budget priorities, and Congress sets the funding.

The debate will begin in a few weeks and continue over the coming months. This debate will be critical as lawmakers weigh the administration’s priorities against the scientific and strategic importance of NASA’s various programmes.

Opposition in Congress: Does NASA have a chance?  

It is already clear that the Trump administration’s budget proposal will face strong opposition in Congress. Many lawmakers from both parties support robust funding for NASA’s science programmes, recognising their importance to economic competitiveness, national security and scientific discovery.

Some have already spoken out against reports of the proposed cuts on Friday and vowed to fight them.

Senator Chris Van Hollen (Democrat of Maryland), the top Democrat or ranking member of the Commerce, Justice and Science subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee, which funds NASA, called the cuts to science and Goddard ‘not only short-sighted, but dangerous.’

‘This is a completely frivolous budget proposal. In my role on the CJS Appropriations subcommittee, I will fight tooth and claw against these cuts and protect the critical work being done at NASA Goddard,’ he said.

At the same time, committee Vice President George Whitesides (Democrat of California) wrote on X that ‘massive cuts to NASA science will not stand.’

The final budget outcome will depend on negotiations between the White House and Congress, and it is not yet clear whether the proposed cuts will be enacted.

Conclusions

NASA’s Science Directorate is critical to the structure of the space agency.

Almost all of the most significant achievements of the past 25 years have been achieved through science programmes: the Ingenuity mission to Mars, the New Horizons mission over Pluto, images from the James Webb Space Telescope, the discovery of thousands of exoplanets, sample returns from asteroids and comets, Cassini’s discovery of water plumes on Enceladus—the continued presence of robots on Mars, and much more.

Even the recent Moon landings of Firefly and Intuitive Machines were funded by NASA’s Science Directorate.

This drastic reduction in funding for space science will have long-term negative consequences.

First and foremost, it could lead to a decline in other critical scientific fields, potentially affecting the nation’s overall competitiveness and preparedness for future challenges.

In addition, it could discourage young people from pursuing careers in science, hinder innovation, and weaken the country’s ability to address humanity’s pressing problems.

Ultimately, this approach will call into question American scientific leadership shortly.