Last week, US President Donald Trump announced a monumental task for NASA: sending the first humans to Mars.

However, his budget proposal for fiscal year 2026 also included the cancellation of numerous NASA projects, which span research on Earth, Mars, and Venus. Additionally, on May 31, Trump retracted his nomination of Jared Isaacman, a businessman and commercial astronaut, for the position of NASA Administrator.

These developments have thrown NASA into a state of disarray, leaving the scientific community divided on the feasibility of the Mars initiative.

Supporting Scientific Reporting

If you find value in this content, please consider supporting our high-quality journalism by subscribing. Your subscription helps sustain the future of our detailed coverage on pivotal discoveries and influential ideas shaping our world.

Financial Challenges

NASA has long harbored ambitions to send astronauts to Mars, but technological and financial constraints suggest this may not be feasible until the 2040s based on current projections. Trump is pushing to expedite this timeline. On May 30, his administration proposed allocating about $1 billion in 2026 for Mars initiatives, which includes the development of new spacesuits and a system for astronaut landings. “This funding will equip us with the necessary technology for future exploration of Mars and potential crewed missions,” stated the NASA budget proposal.

Experts in space policy argue that if NASA is serious about manned missions to Mars, it will need to significantly increase its budget. A manned mission to Mars could cost hundreds of billions of dollars over several years, while the agency’s current annual budget is $25 billion. Trump’s proposal would reduce this to less than $19 billion. “With the proposed budgets, we simply can’t afford a manned mission to Mars,” noted John Grunsfeld, a former NASA astronaut and astrophysicist who managed the agency’s science programs from 2012 to 2016.

Trump’s recent emphasis on Mars reflects his earlier presidency when he announced in 2017 that NASA would return astronauts to the Moon. In 2022, NASA tested a mega-rocket designed for this purpose, but the Artemis I mission was unmanned. Numerous technological hurdles must be overcome before astronauts can set foot on the Moon, a goal scheduled for 2027.

A critical element of this plan involves the massive Starship vehicle, constructed by SpaceX in Hawthorne, California. After the mega-rocket places astronauts into lunar orbit, they will dock with Starship, which will transport them to the Moon’s surface. However, Starship has not yet successfully completed an Earth orbit, and its latest test flight ended in an explosion on May 27.

Shortly after the explosion, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, who has advised Trump, expressed his hope to launch the first Starship mission to Mars next year. Some researchers are skeptical of Musk’s involvement, given his controversial views on colonizing Mars and his minimal regard for ethical and international standards. Recently, Musk has been influential in Trump’s push to reduce government size and cut science funding, even as SpaceX stands to gain from government contracts for Mars missions.

Challenging Conditions

Despite the skepticism, many are enthusiastic about the prospect of human exploration of Mars. NASA has successfully managed multiple robotic missions to Mars, such as the Curiosity and Perseverance rovers. Researchers like Tanya Harrison, a planetary scientist at the Outer Space Institute in Ottawa, Canada, believe that humans could expedite exploration and provide deeper insights into the presence of life on Mars. “To definitively answer whether Mars had or has life, we need to send humans,” Harrison asserts.

However, those in favor acknowledge that a Mars mission would not only divert funds from other research but also pose significant physical risks. Astronauts would face extreme isolation, increased exposure to deadly space radiation, and after landing, they would have to adapt quickly to Mars’ harsh conditions—frigid temperatures, toxic soil, thin atmosphere, and abrasive dust storms.

One proposed solution involves using underground lava tubes as shelters to protect against radiation and dust storms. Yet, visiting Mars is likened to exploring Antarctica, but with far greater risks. “It’s important to clear any misconceptions that humans will easily adapt to Mars,” stated Erik Antonsen, a space physiology researcher, during a space exploration conference on May 28.

Inclusion of Science in Planning

Trump’s vision may find some support among US lawmakers, who are eager to surpass China in space exploration achievements. China plans to send astronauts to the Moon by 2030 and eventually to Mars.

Scientists like Bruce Jakosky, a planetary scientist at the University of Colorado Boulder, are advocating for the integration of scientific objectives in the planning of manned Mars missions. Jakosky and his team conducted a study in 2023 identifying crucial scientific objectives for Mars, including astrobiology research.

In the short term, Jakosky suggests that NASA should focus on a robotic mission to retrieve samples collected by the $2.7 billion Perseverance rover on Mars. This would demonstrate NASA’s capability to launch and return spacecraft from Mars and allow for detailed analysis of Martian rocks and soil. However, Trump has proposed scrapping this mission due to budget constraints.

Grunsfeld believes NASA should streamline its approach to getting humans to Mars, which could include testing new spacesuit designs on the International Space Station instead of building extensive lunar bases. “We need to maximize the use of our current technology,” he states.

Regardless of the decisions made by NASA, Congress, and Trump, the political uncertainty poses a significant challenge, according to Harrison. She is concerned that the recent proposals may not maintain momentum: “Is this just posturing, and will Mars be forgotten in a year?” she questions.

This article is reproduced with permission and was first published on June 4, 2025.