The ongoing feud between President Donald Trump and billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk has escalated into a broader crisis for America’s space program. The Trump administration’s proposed NASA budget for the coming fiscal year calls for a staggering 25% reduction in overall funding, with scientific missions set to bear the brunt of the cuts.
NASA’s request, which was published this week, slashes support for nearly 40 science missions—both operational and in development. While the administration has boosted funding for a future crewed mission to Mars by $100 million, it has recommended deep cuts across all other areas, including planetary science and Earth observation programs.
Threat to SpaceX Contracts and NASA Partnerships
Tensions flared after President Trump publicly criticized Musk over his comments regarding the bill, threatening to withdraw federal contracts with SpaceX. This move would disrupt NASA’s current reliance on SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rockets for transporting astronauts and supplies to the International Space Station (ISS).
More critically, NASA has also been counting on SpaceX’s yet-to-be-fully-developed Starship rocket for future crewed missions to the Moon and Mars. Experts warn that severing ties with SpaceX or destabilizing its government contracts could cripple timelines for these missions and jeopardize long-standing international collaborations.
Scientific Missions and Climate Monitoring at Risk
According to NASA’s own figures, the proposed budget could effectively terminate dozens of active and planned science missions. These include Earth observation satellites critical to climate research, as well as exploratory missions to other planets—many of which are international partnerships where most costs have already been incurred.
Dr. Adam Baker, a space analyst at Cranfield University, warns that ending these missions would result in the loss of invaluable data and scientific momentum. “Our ability to understand and respond to climate change would be significantly impaired. These Earth observation programmes are our canary in the coal mine,” he said.
International Collaborations in Jeopardy
The fallout could also fracture NASA’s relationships with global partners like the European Space Agency (ESA). Two high-profile joint missions are under threat: the return of Martian soil samples collected by NASA’s Perseverance Rover, and the deployment of ESA’s Rosalind Franklin Rover to Mars.
Prof. Sir Martin Sweeting, chair of Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd, acknowledged the potential for Europe to take greater leadership in space exploration but lamented the uncertainty. “It is an opportunity, yes, but an unwelcome one. Europe may now be forced to act independently if NASA withdraws.”
SLS to Be Retired, But Replacements Unproven
The White House budget also calls for the phasing out of NASA’s troubled Space Launch System (SLS), citing its astronomical costs—estimated at $4.1 billion per launch. Instead, the administration plans to rely on commercial alternatives such as SpaceX’s Starship and Blue Origin’s New Glenn rocket, both of which promise reusability and lower launch costs.
However, experts caution that neither of these systems is yet flight-proven. The last three Starship tests have ended in failure, and Blue Origin’s Moon rocket is still in early testing. “We may be jumping from the frying pan into the fire,” warned Dr. Simeon Barber of the Open University. “If these companies need more funds or delay development, Congress will have to foot the bill.”
A New Vision or a Dangerous Gamble?
Supporters of the budget argue it restores a clear mission to NASA—one focused on putting American boots on Mars and reasserting dominance in the new space race, particularly against China. Critics, however, see it as a narrow, politically driven vision that sacrifices decades of scientific progress.
Casey Dreier of the Planetary Society described the proposed budget as “the biggest crisis ever to face the US space programme.” He warns that long-term planning—the backbone of successful space science—is being replaced with unpredictable, short-term political decision-making.
Congressional Uncertainty Looms Large
The budget is not final and must pass through Congress, where there is bipartisan concern about its implications. While some Republicans have reportedly expressed willingness to vote against the cuts, political gridlock remains a looming threat.
If no consensus is reached, the administration’s proposal may go into effect by default. Dreier notes the danger in this scenario: “Once space missions are shut down, they’re rarely restarted. The damage could be permanent.” As lawmakers debate, the future of U.S. space science—and its global leadership—hangs in the balance.
