Judge Slams Trump Admin for Unconstitutional Axing of $100M Humanities Grants

In a sharp rebuke of Trump-era authoritarian overreach, U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon ruled on Thursday that the Trump administration’s cancellation of more than $100 million in humanities grants was unconstitutional. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) had no legal authority to terminate these congressionally approved funds, the judge found, permanently barring the administration from ending the grants.

The lawsuit, brought by The Authors Guild and several academic and cultural organizations, challenged the administration’s decision to cut over 1,400 grants awarded to scholars, writers, and research groups. These grants were largely targeted because of their association with diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts—an explicit viewpoint discrimination that the judge called “textbook.”

Government lawyers defended the cuts as lawful implementation of President Trump’s executive orders aimed at eliminating “radical and wasteful” DEI programs and reducing discretionary spending. But Judge McMahon rejected this justification, ruling that the First Amendment’s free speech protections and the Fifth Amendment’s equal protection clause were violated. The government had no constitutional license to suppress ideas it disfavored.

Adding to the outrage, the judge highlighted DOGE’s troubling use of artificial intelligence—specifically ChatGPT—to identify and cancel grants linked to DEI. One example cited was an anthology titled “In the Shadow of the Holocaust: Short Fiction by Jewish Writers from the Soviet Union,” which was wrongly flagged as a DEI project. The court made clear that outsourcing viewpoint censorship to AI does not shield the government from constitutional accountability.

The canceled grants were announced in April 2025, following Trump’s executive orders targeting DEI programs and pushing a “cost efficiency initiative.” Letters from the acting chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities informed recipients their funding was being “repurposed” to align with the President’s agenda. Most of the affected grants were awarded during the Biden administration, with only a small fraction spared.

“This ruling is a major victory for free speech and the humanities,” said Sarah Weicksel, executive director of the American Historical Association. Attorney Yinka Ezekiel Onayemi of The Authors Guild called the cancellations “a direct assault on constitutional free speech and equal protection,” praising the court for reaffirming Congress’s longstanding commitment to the humanities.

Judge McMahon emphasized that while new administrations can set funding priorities, they cannot silence disfavored viewpoints. The ruling underscores the urgent need to guard democratic norms and prevent executive overreach that threatens intellectual freedom and the integrity of public institutions.

The Trump administration’s attempt to weaponize AI and executive power to gut humanities funding has been stopped in its tracks. But the battle over democratic accountability and free expression in government funding is far from over. We will keep tracking every move that threatens our constitutional rights and the open marketplace of ideas.