Federal Judge Rules Trump Administration's Humanities Grant Cuts Unlawful and Unconstitutional
A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration's decision to cut humanities grants to major scholarly groups was deemed unlawful and unconstitutional. The Department of Government and Efficiency terminated grants approved by Congress from the National Endowment for the Humanities in April 2025, affecting organizations like the American Council of Learned Societies, the American Historical Association, and the Modern Language Association of America. The groups filed a lawsuit in May 2025, arguing that the administration's actions were unconstitutional and lacked statutory authority.
U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon's ruling stated that the grant terminations violated the First Amendment, the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment, and were done without statutory authority. The judge found that DOGE officials did not have the legal authority to terminate the grants and prohibited the administration from enforcing the terminations. The decision also addressed a lawsuit from The Authors Guild, whose members were impacted by the grant cuts.
The court's decision highlighted that DOGE staff did not review grant applications or underlying materials before deciding which grants to terminate. They also used ChatGPT to justify the terminations based on diversity, equity, and inclusion-related reasons. Judge McMahon noted that the staff leading the effort were inexperienced and lacked expertise in humanities-related matters.
In conclusion, the judge's ruling deemed the administration's actions as unconstitutional and unlawful, emphasizing the lack of statutory authority for the grant terminations. The decision serves as a significant win for the affected scholarly groups and underscores the importance of upholding constitutional principles in government actions.