The Trump administration canceled more than $100 million Humanities scholarships for scientists, writers, research groups and other organizations was unconstitutional, and the Department of State Efficiency did not have the authority to terminate funding, a federal judge in New York ruled Thursday.
U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon in Manhattan sided with the Authors Guild, several other groups, and many people who… Their grants were revoked and they were prosecuted DOGE and the National Endowment for the Humanities. McMahon permanently blocked the administration from terminating grants and criticized DOGE’s use of artificial intelligence in eliminating funding.
Government lawyers had argued that reducing more than 1,400 grant funds approved by Congress were legal steps to implement President Donald Trump’s directives and eliminate grants tied to financial aid. Transformation, equity and inclusion Reducing discretionary spending is part of the administration’s priorities.
The White House and Justice Department, which fought against the lawsuit, did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment Thursday evening. It was not immediately clear whether an appeal would be filed.
McMahon said the government violated the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment’s right to equal protection, and DOGE did not have the legal authority to revoke the grants. She wrote, for example, that it was a “typical example of unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination” when officials canceled grants based on DEI.
“The public interest favors permanent relief,” McMahon wrote in her ruling. “The public has a strong interest in ensuring that federal officials act within the limits set by Congress and the Constitution.”
Several groups that sued the government, including the American Council of Learned Societies, the American Historical Association, and the Modern Language Association, praised the decision in a joint statement.
“This ruling is an important accomplishment in our efforts to restore NEH’s ability to fulfill the vital mission Congress has given it: to help create and sustain ‘a climate that encourages freedom of thought, imagination, and inquiry’ through the humanities,” said Sarah Wicksell, executive director of the American Historical Association.
Yinka Ezekiel Onayemi, a lawyer for the Authors Guild, described the cancellation of the grants as “a direct assault on constitutional freedom of expression and equal protection.”
“We are pleased with the court’s decision, which exonerates our clients: the amazing academics, writers, and institutions who do work that is so important to our democracy,” Anaimi said in a statement. “It also reaffirms that Congress’s 60-year commitment to the humanities cannot be dismantled by an overreaching executive.”
The judge examined how government officials classified grant projects as DEI and used ChatGPT to target them with funding cuts. In one case, she said, officials, using an AI platform, named DEI an anthology titled “In the Shadow of the Holocaust: A Novel by Jewish Writers from the Soviet Union.” Many other examples are also included.
McMahon also rejected the government’s argument that there was no constitutional problem because any set of views was ChatGPT’s doing, not the government’s.
“ChatGPT was the government’s chosen tool for purposes of this project, and DOGE’s use of AI to identify DEI-related material neither excuses supposedly unconstitutional conduct nor gives the government carte blanche to engage in it,” she wrote.
The cancellation of the grants was announced in April 2025, three months after Trump issued an order Executive order Titled “Ending Extreme, Wasteful, and Favorite Government DEI Programs.” In February 2025, Trump issued another executive order to implement DOGE’s “Cost Efficiency Initiative.”
Michael McDonald, who was then acting head of the National Endowment for the Humanities, sent letters to grant recipients informing them that their grants were being cancelled.
In a letter to one organization dated April 1, 2025, he wrote: “NEH has reasonable cause to terminate the grant in light of the fact that NEH is reallocating its funding allocations in a new direction to advance the President’s agenda.”
Many of the canceled grants were awarded during the Biden administration, and only about 40 grants awarded by that administration were excluded from the cuts, the judge wrote.
While the new administration may pursue lawful funding priorities, it “does not have a license to suppress unfavorable ideas,” McMahon wrote.
In a Temporary block Regarding the cancellation of grants issued last year that raised First Amendment and other issues, the judge said that “Defendants terminated grants based on the perceived viewpoint of the recipients, in an attempt to keep such views out of the marketplace of ideas.”