Sullivan says she and her co-plaintiffs didn’t see a legal path forward, so they agreed to have the case dismissed this week.

“It’s a total victory,” says Asher Smith, director of litigation at the PETA Foundation, which represents the animal rights group. “It sets an incredibly important legal precedent,” he says. “It’s going to make it much harder for any IACUC to make legal arguments for anonymity.”

That concerns Naomi Charalambakis, director of communications and science policy at Americans for Medical Progress, which defends the need for animal research. Like jurors, she says, IACUC members should be able to do their jobs without fear of exposure or harassment. She worries the decision will make it harder to fill these committees—a sentiment echoed by the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH). “Such actions may affect recruitment of IACUC members in certain situations,” an agency spokesperson tells Science. “We take very seriously the humane care and use of laboratory animals used in NIH-funded research and recognize the importance of having IACUCs being fully involved throughout these activities.”

Charalambakis says without IACUCs, critical animal research can’t move forward. “If they’re disrupted, it throws everything off balance.”

Read more.

Published May 2, 2025 by David Grimm, Science