A federal judge in New York has ruled that the Trump administration's cancellation of more than $100 million in humanities grants was unconstitutional, and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) lacked the authority to end the funding. U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon in Manhattan sided with The Authors Guild and other plaintiffs, permanently barring the administration from terminating the grants. She criticized DOGE's use of artificial intelligence in the cancellation process.
Ruling Details
Judge McMahon determined that the government violated the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment's equal protection clause. She wrote that DOGE did not have lawful authority to cancel the grants and that the cancellations constituted "a textbook example of unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination" when based on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) criteria. The judge permanently enjoined the administration from terminating the grants, stating, "The public interest favors permanent relief. The public has a strong interest in ensuring that federal officials act within the bounds set by Congress and the Constitution."
Background of the Case
The grants, totaling over $100 million, were awarded to scholars, writers, research groups, and other organizations. The cancellations were announced in April 2025, following executive orders by President Donald Trump targeting DEI programs and implementing DOGE's cost efficiency initiative. Government lawyers argued the cuts were legal moves to implement presidential directives and reduce discretionary spending. However, the judge rejected these arguments, noting that the government used ChatGPT to classify grant projects as DEI and target them for funding cuts.
Reaction from Plaintiffs
Several groups that sued, including the American Council of Learned Societies, American Historical Association, and Modern Language Association, hailed the decision. Sarah Weicksel, executive director of the American Historical Association, said the ruling restores the NEH's ability to fulfill its mission of fostering freedom of thought and inquiry. Yinka Ezekiel Onayemi, an attorney for the Authors Guild, called the cancellations "a direct assault on constitutional free speech and equal protection" and praised the court's decision as vindicating the plaintiffs and reaffirming Congress's commitment to the humanities.
Criticism of AI Use
Judge McMahon scrutinized the government's reliance on ChatGPT to identify DEI-related material. She rejected the argument that viewpoint classification by AI absolved the government of constitutional violations, stating, "ChatGPT was the Government’s chosen instrument... and DOGE’s use of AI to identify DEI-related material neither excuses presumptively unconstitutional conduct nor gives the Government carte blanche to engage in it." Examples included an anthology titled "In the Shadow of the Holocaust: Short Fiction by Jewish Writers from the Soviet Union" being labeled as DEI.
Impact and Next Steps
The White House and Department of Justice did not immediately respond to requests for comment, and it remains unclear whether an appeal will be filed. The ruling permanently blocks the grant cancellations, which had affected over 1,400 grants. Many of the canceled grants were awarded during the Biden administration, with only about 40 spared. Judge McMahon emphasized that while a new administration may pursue lawful funding priorities, "it has no license to suppress disfavored ideas."
