A federal judge has deemed the mass termination of grants orchestrated by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) unlawful, effectively preventing the Trump administration from proceeding with the cancellation of over 1,400 grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH).
Judge Colleen McMahon of the Southern District of New York declared the NEH grant terminations illegal in a comprehensive 143-page ruling. She concluded that DOGE employees lacked the legal authority to make such decisions, and the process they used bore no semblance to the NEH's standard grant review procedures.
"There's no serious dispute that the review process implemented by DOGE did not conform to, nor even resemble, the ordinary NEH grant review process," Judge McMahon stated.
These cancellations impacted over $100 million in congressionally approved funds, marking the largest mass termination of previously awarded grants in NEH history.
The judge also found that DOGE "blatantly used" protected characteristics such as race, gender, and religion as criteria for withdrawing funding.
"To treat the history of African American civil rights, Jewish Holocaust testimony, Asian-American experiences, the shameful treatment of tribal children, or merely mentioning a woman as indicators of lack of merit or wastefulness is illegal," she asserted.
The ruling was particularly critical of the cancellation of Holocaust-related grants focusing on Jewish women survivors of Nazism.
"In a time when the specter of antisemitism has re-emerged, it is deeply disturbing that our Government would view a project on Jewish women unfavorably for focusing on Jewish cultures and female voices," Judge McMahon wrote.
The lawsuit was spearheaded by three organizations: the American Council of Learned Societies (ACLS), the American Historical Association (AHA), and the Modern Language Association (MLA).
The Misguided Use of AI in Grant Decisions
Central to the ruling were depositions from two DOGE employees, Justin Fox and Nathan Cavanaugh, who admitted to using ChatGPT and diversity-related keywords—such as "DEI, DEIA, Equity, Inclusion, BIPAC, LGBTQ"—to decide which grants to cancel, without reviewing the applications or supporting materials.
Neither had prior government experience before joining DOGE, and they lacked training in the humanities.
In his deposition, Cavanaugh showed no remorse for the failed objectives of the cuts.
"Do you regret that individuals might have lost significant income needed to sustain their lives?" an attorney asked.
"No. I believed it was more important to reduce the federal deficit from two trillion to nearly zero," Cavanaugh replied. When questioned if they succeeded in reducing it, he admitted, "No, we did not."
Recurrent Legal Challenges for DOGE
This decision marks another judicial setback for DOGE. In May 2025, another federal judge ruled against DOGE's takeover of the United States Institute of Peace, highlighting a pattern of legal defeats due to lack of authority and discriminatory criteria.
Joy Connolly, president of the ACLS, applauded the ruling, reflecting the stance of the plaintiff organizations: "The humanities are not a luxury. They are how a democracy understands itself. Today's decision is a step toward honoring Congress's intent and our mission as a nation."
Understanding the Legal Implications of DOGE's Grant Terminations
What was the basis for declaring the grant terminations illegal?
The terminations were deemed illegal because DOGE employees lacked legal authority and used a review process that did not conform to standard NEH procedures, alongside employing discriminatory criteria.
How much funding was affected by these cancellations?
The cancellations impacted over $100 million in funds that had previously been approved by Congress, making it the largest mass termination of grants in NEH history.
What organizations were involved in challenging the DOGE's actions?
The lawsuit was brought forward by the American Council of Learned Societies, the American Historical Association, and the Modern Language Association.