The White House is proposing billions of dollars in cuts to NASA that include phasing out a major rocket program based at the agency’s Huntsville center.

President Donald Trump’s budget request to fund the agency calls for a phase-out of the Space Launch System, the super-heavy, expendable launch vehicle that is intended to propel humans to the moon. The SLS, which the president’s budget request calls “grossly expensive and delayed,” is managed by Marshall Space Flight Center.

Reports circulated last month that a 20% cut to NASA’s budget was being considered. The proposal released Friday requests even larger cuts.

It seeks $18.8 billion in funding for NASA, down 24.3%, or $6 billion, from the $24.8 billion approved for the space agency last year.

A White House statement emphasized the request’s funding for both moon and Mars initiatives, including new money for private-sector investment.

“By allocating over $7 billion for lunar exploration and introducing $1 billion in new investments for Mars-focused programs, the Budget ensures that America’s human space exploration efforts remain unparalleled, innovative, and efficient,” the statement read.

The agency’s human space exploration program would see a $647 million boost in funding – the only major NASA program to come out ahead in the president’s proposal.

Yet the budget request would cut $879 million from “legacy” spaceflight projects like SLS and the Orion crew capsule by phasing them out after the Artemis 3 mission, which will land humans on the moon for the first time since Apollo 17 and is planned for a mid-2027 launch.

Artemis, NASA’s $100 billion, decade-long human lunar exploration program, includes plans for a permanent colony on the moon, which is intended to serve as a steppingstone for crewed Mars missions. Artemis currently consists of 10 planned lunar missions through 2035, all of them intended to launch atop the SLS and to house the crew in Orion capsules.

The proposal does not specifically call for Artemis to be wound down. Trump himself laid the groundwork for Artemis during his first term. Yet he is advised by SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk, who has dismissed the moon as a “distraction” and suggested colonizing Mars should be a policy priority.

Trump’s nominee to lead NASA, entrepreneur Jared Isaacman, has signaled support for human exploration of both the moon and Mars during Senate confirmation hearings.

As a single-use system, SLS has been criticized as expensive and outdated compared with partly reusable heavy launch vehicles like SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy and Blue Origin’s New Glenn.

SLS, however, has a larger payload capacity than either and is described by NASA as, “the only vehicle that can send [the] Orion spacecraft, four astronauts, and large cargo directly to the moon on a single launch.”

Instead of the “legacy” SLS and Orion, the White House budget request seeks to promote, “more cost-effective commercial systems that would support more ambitious subsequent lunar missions.”

Major private-sector launch companies include Musk’s SpaceX, which currently has the lion’s share of commercial space launch contracts, as well as Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin and United Launch Alliance, a joint venture of Boeing and Lockheed Martin. The latter two companies both have a large and growing presence in north Alabama.

But none of those private companies compare with NASA in terms of economic impact, either nationally or in the Yellowhammer State, where the agency’s Moon to Mars initiative – headlined by Artemis – is big business.

A 2024 study found a greater economic impact for NASA’s Artemis-related work in Alabama than in any other state. It tallied $5.1 billion in effects and attributed much of that to the reach of Marshall Space Flight Center.

In addition to the SLS, Marshall Space Flight Center manages the lunar landing aspects of Artemis, as well as developing software and building adapters for various stages of the spacecraft.

Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor for Orion, while several elements of the SLS are built in Huntsville, as is the adapter for the Orion stage. Orion is assembled at the Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans, which is also managed by MSFC.

Marshall is one of the largest of NASA’s 10 field centers, employing nearly 7,000 federal workers and contractors in Huntsville and managing a multibillion-dollar budget for programs related to human spaceflight – like Artemis.

Rep. Dale Strong, whose 5th Congressional District includes MSFC, said in a statement to AL.com that he has, “taken every opportunity to advocate for North Alabama and our capabilities which put us at the crossroads of technological innovation, space exploration, and national security.

“I am proud to serve as vice chairman of the Appropriations, Commerce, Justice, and Science subcommittee, which gives north Alabama a seat at the table during the annual appropriations process,” he said. “The work that is done in our district at Marshall Space Flight Center is central to NASA’s most critical missions and ensures our nation remains the leader in space innovation and exploration.”

The proposed White House cuts extend well beyond SLS and Orion, touching most major NASA programs.

Mission Support would see a $1.1 billion cut through reductions to the workforce, along with IT and NASA Center operations, maintenance and “environmental compliance activities.” Another $1.1 billion would disappear from earth science research, with funding eliminated for “low-priority climate monitoring satellites”

Over a half-billion dollars would be trimmed from the International Space Station. Crew and cargo flights would be “significantly reduced” ahead of a “safe decommissioning of the station by 2030 and replacement by commercial space stations,” according to the budget request.

The White House further seeks to eliminate the Office of STEM Engagement, which promotes learning opportunities and career pathways for students.

“NASA will inspire the next generation of explorers through exciting, ambitious space missions, not through subsidizing woke STEM programming and research that prioritizes some groups of students over others and have had minimal impact on the aerospace workforce,” the request states.