Since the start of the second Trump administration, NASA’s formal advisory committees have largely been suspended. While the congressionally mandated Aerospace Safety Advisory Committee has continued its work, the NASA Advisory Council and its committees have been on hold, and it’s uncertain when they might resume.
When they do, there will be changes. The agency said earlier this year that, in response to executive orders, it would eliminate a set of advisory subcommittees devoted to specific science disciplines: astrophysics, planetary science, Earth science, heliophysics and biological and physical sciences. A single science committee would replace those subcommittees.
Also in play was a separate subset of committees, known as analysis groups or assessment groups, or simply AGs, in astrophysics and planetary science. They are not formal advisory groups in that they are not governed by the Federal Advisory Committee Act with requirements to provide findings or recommendations that NASA must respond to. Instead, they offer input to NASA and its advisory committees.
“There is nothing anywhere written that says that NASA has to listen to us,” said Vicky Hamilton, a planetary scientist at the Southwest Research Institute who chairs the Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group (MEPAG) during a meeting of the group on April 30.
Nonetheless, MEPAG and other planetary science groups focused on topics ranging from asteroids and comets to the outer solar system have had a good relationship with NASA, which provided a modest amount of financial support. But in late January, NASA instructed the AGs to pause their activities, citing efforts to comply with new executive orders.
This caused some AGs to postpone or cancel meetings, although by March NASA allowed meetings to resume. The groups, though, have been advised to limit their work, and NASA’s financial support is in question after this fiscal year. NASA is contemplating other changes to the groups, Hamilton said, although specifics are not public.
Frustration is mounting in how the pause in activities was handled. The support for the planetary science AGs is administered by the Universities Space Research Association (USRA) through the Lunar and Planetary Institute (LPI). When NASA ordered the halt in AG activities, USRA took the groups’ websites offline to review their documents for compliance with new executive orders, particularly regarding diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI).
“USRA has decided that any document with any mention of DEI will not be reposted to our websites,” Hamilton said, including reports and meeting agendas. That extends, she added, to USRA’s management of meetings like the Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, where it has removed papers and abstracts related to DEI topics.
USRA, in a separate statement, said it did so to ensure compliance with executive orders. “After consulting with our counsel and in a good faith effort to comply with these Administration directives to the best of our understanding of their terms, USRA/LPI removed (not deleted) all DEI-related content from the public-facing websites,” it stated.
That explanation has not sat well with scientists, including AG members. At the MEPAG meeting, one attendee called the removal of the documents “Orwellian.” Hamilton said the group was looking into options to host the removed documents on a third-party website not controlled by USRA.
The long-term outlook of the AGs is unclear. “Our future funding may depend on allowing NASA to have a greater measure of authority over our activities than we’ve been accustomed to,” she said. “The question becomes, ‘is that ok or is independence our priority?’”
NASA’s advisory committee ecosystem is complex and could benefit from restructuring or simplification, making it easier for the agency to receive that advice. However, neither the agency nor the scientific community may be served if those opportunities are reduced or the committees’ inputs restricted.
“We’re the heart of the communities that we represent,” Hamilton said. “We give a voice to the community, with NASA and with the public.”
But will NASA want to listen?
This article first appeared in the June 2025 issue of SpaceNews Magazine with the title “Who should NASA listen to?”
