NEW YORK – Halley Froehlich was sure she’d spend her scientific career in the United States. Her family has been in America since the 1700s.
But over the past two years, delayed federal grants and fears about the future motivated her to pack her life into boxes. She moved to Finland with her husband and daughter and is continuing her research — studying how fish, shellfish and seaweed that humans eat are responding to climate change — at the University of Helsinki.
When the Trump administration began upending U.S. scientific research last year, dismantling the federal grant-giving process and attempting to exert more political influence over what projects get funded, foreign universities saw an opportunity. They adopted programs to lure U.S. researchers abroad, promising more stable streams of funding and academic freedom.
Since then, many have taken the bait. While there is no way to quantify the overall change across the nation, scientists, researchers and professional groups say the shift is clear, unprecedented and concerning.
“You can almost talk to any vice president for research at a university and they will tell you of one or two top faculty that they’ve lost,” said Tobin Smith, senior vice president of government relations and public policy for the Association of American Universities.
White House spokesperson Liz Huston said Trump is “ending waste” and is “committed to keeping America the world leader in scientific innovation, and that means funding real science.”
However, more than half of American states have lost scientists to recruitment programs in other countries, according to an April report from the Business for Federal Research Funding Coalition. Notably, early-career biomedical scientists reported being about 20 percentage points less likely to express intentions to remain in the U.S. compared to six months earlier. Furthermore, physics Ph.D. graduates in 2025 departed the U.S. at the highest rate in 30 years, as highlighted by the American Institute of Physics.
Countries including Canada, France, Belgium, and Finland are actively recruiting U.S. scientists, a trend that raises alarms for a nation renowned for its achievements in Nobel prizes for medicine, physics, and chemistry.
“It used to be the shining city on the hill where we all want to go,” remarked Christine Stawitz, now at the University of Birmingham in England. “That reputational loss, I think, is hard to quantify, but also really damaging.”
Stawitz left her job at the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration last year to become a research software engineer in the United Kingdom. She expressed concerns over NOAA’s shift away from scientific integrity, particularly after being instructed to remove references to climate change and diversity, equity, and inclusion from websites.
“People talk about the U.S. at conferences in the U.K. now like, I don’t know what’s going on there. It’s not good,” she noted.
Froehlich’s decision to leave was a gradual process. Her growing concerns about school safety and gun violence in the U.S. were exacerbated by the upheaval in the research landscape. At the University of California, Santa Barbara, she witnessed colleagues’ grants being postponed or canceled, leaving student researchers distressed about their futures. This uncertainty fueled her worries about securing future federal funding for her climate change research.
“The cumulative effect of those things ultimately ended up making us really serious about, I don’t think here is our home anymore,” Froehlich reflected. She was recruited through an initiative by the Research Council of Finland and now has five years of guaranteed funding totaling about $3 million. Upon relocating, she settled into a flat by the Baltic Sea in Helsinki and is taking Finnish lessons offered by the university.
The trend is also evident among international scientists who once flocked to the U.S. for its esteemed scientific reputation. Married biologists James Letts and Maria Maldonado departed their positions at the University of California, Davis, to join Australia’s Monash University. Letts hails from Canada, and Maldonado from Argentina, both having earned their doctoral degrees in New York and spent over a decade conducting research in the U.S.
Facing grant uncertainties — which even forced them to lay off a staff scientist while awaiting stalled funding — they made the decision to relocate.
“All I want to do is do great science and make discoveries, but I want my work to mean something as well. And the opportunity to do that seemed very difficult in the U.S.,” Letts shared.
Notably, 40% of the U.S. science Nobel Prizes were awarded to immigrants. Omar Yaghi, a 2025 Nobel Prize winner for chemistry, recently left his position at the University of California, Berkeley, to lead an artificial intelligence lab at China’s Tsinghua University.
The consequences of losing scientific talent are multifaceted. While the U.S. remains a scientific powerhouse with a multitude of well-resourced institutions, the loss of esteemed researchers could take a toll on the nation’s innovation landscape. Even if European countries opened their doors wide, the capacity to accommodate all departing American scientists is limited.
Importantly, not all scientists are leaving. Many choose to stay, seeking alternative funding sources or transitioning to industry jobs. However, the erosion of reputation and the potential talent drain pose significant concerns for the future of U.S. science.
The Trump administration has reportedly cut or frozen up to $174 billion in federal grants since the onset of his second term, according to a tracking tool by the States United Democracy Center and the organization Grant Witness. Additionally, a proposed rule from the Office of Management and Budget could grant political appointees greater control over future project funding, with Congress delaying a final decision until December.
Scientists who have relocated and those remaining in the U.S. express deep concern about the implications for future generations of researchers. With fewer graduate programs, reduced funding, and limited mentorship opportunities, the repercussions could linger for a decade or longer, reshaping the landscape of the U.S. scientific enterprise.
Admissions data collected by the Association of American Universities indicates that major research institutions accepted 15% fewer applicants for fall 2026 doctoral programs compared to the previous year. One of the affected students was a mentee of Smith’s.
“What is one of my pieces of advice to that young man? Next year, look in Canada,” Smith advised.
___
The Associated Press’ health and science coverage receives financial support from the AP Fund for Journalism and private foundations. AP is
