Key facts
- A federal judge ruled the Trump administration cannot cancel grants based on presidential priorities.
- The administration cannot use a White House budget office regulation to terminate grants.
- A separate ruling found the cancellation of over $100 million in humanities grants unconstitutional.
- The administration was barred from terminating these grants, with one judge criticizing AI use in funding decisions.
- Judges cited violations of the First and Fifth Amendments, including unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.
A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration cannot cancel billions of dollars in grants based on a White House budget office regulation that allowed for termination if grants were inconsistent with presidential priorities. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston agreed with a group of Democratic-led states that the clause, introduced in 2020, did not grant the administration authority to revoke grants simply due to shifting agency focus.
In a separate but related ruling, U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon in New York found the Trump administration's cancellation of over $100 million in humanities grants to scholars, writers, and research groups to be unconstitutional. McMahon permanently barred the administration from terminating these grants, criticizing the Department of Government Efficiency's (DOGE) use of artificial intelligence in nixing the funding. Government lawyers had argued that the cuts were legal measures to implement President Donald Trump's directives, eliminate grants associated with diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), and reduce discretionary spending.
McMahon stated that the government violated the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment's equal protection right, asserting that DOGE lacked the lawful authority to cancel the grants. She described the cancellations based on DEI as "a textbook example of unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination." The judge emphasized that "the public interest favors permanent relief" and that federal officials must act within the bounds set by Congress and the Constitution. Several groups, including The Authors Guild, the American Council of Learned Societies, the American Historical Association, and the Modern Language Association, hailed the decision.