Judge Rules DOGE Humanities Grant Cuts Unconstitutional

A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration’s termination of hundreds of humanities grants through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) was unconstitutional and discriminatory. The decision marks a major legal setback for President Donald Trump’s cost-cutting initiative, which was previously led by billionaire Elon Musk.

U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon said the administration violated both the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment after canceling more than 1,400 humanities grants worth over $100 million in federal funding. The grants had been awarded by the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) to scholars, writers, universities, and cultural organizations across the United States.

According to the ruling, DOGE targeted projects connected to minority communities, race, religion, immigration, gender, and sexual orientation. Judge McMahon stated that the government engaged in “blatant viewpoint discrimination” by terminating grants tied to Black, Latino, Asian, Indigenous, Jewish, Muslim, Christian, LGBTQ+, and immigrant-related subjects.

The court also criticized DOGE’s reported use of artificial intelligence tools, including ChatGPT, in developing explanations for some of the grant cancellations. Judge McMahon said the federal government could not avoid responsibility by blaming AI-generated recommendations for the decisions.

The lawsuit centered on the Trump administration’s broader efforts to reduce federal spending on diversity initiatives, educational programs, arts institutions, and cultural organizations. Critics argue these actions threaten academic freedom, historical preservation, and free speech protections in the United States.

Trump has repeatedly accused universities, museums, and public broadcasters of promoting liberal and anti-American values. His administration previously threatened funding cuts targeting institutions connected to diversity policies, climate initiatives, transgender rights, and pro-Palestinian protests related to the Gaza conflict.

The ruling is expected to intensify debate over free speech, government funding, diversity programs, and the growing role of artificial intelligence in federal decision-making.