In a landmark ruling on May 7, 2026, U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon declared that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—led by Elon Musk—unconstitutionally used race, gender, and other protected characteristics to execute what historians are calling the largest mass termination of federally funded humanities work in American history. The court found that over 1,400 National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) grants were unlawfully cancelled through an AI-driven process that specifically targeted projects related to Black civil rights, the Holocaust, Asian American experiences, and women's history.

The 143-page ruling offers a scathing indictment of DOGE's methods, which the judge described as a "clumsy" and "automated" approach that bypassed meaningful scholarly review. Judge McMahon permanently barred the Trump administration from enforcing these specific grant terminations and ordered their immediate reinstatement, declaring the cancellations "unlawful, unconstitutional, ultra vires, and without legal effect." The lawsuit was led by the Authors Guild, the American Historical Association, and the Modern Language Association, who argued the cuts had brought critical humanities work to a "screeching halt."

The court found that DOGE "blatantly used" race and gender as markers of "wastefulness" or "lack of merit," specifically targeting projects related to Black civil rights, the Holocaust, Asian American experiences, and any mention of women. The ruling emphasized that these actions violated the First Amendment's protection against viewpoint discrimination and the Equal Protection component of the Fifth Amendment. Judge McMahon noted that DOGE officials—who are not Senate-confirmed—lacked the statutory authority to direct the termination of congressionally approved NEH grants, making their actions ultra vires, or beyond their legal power.

AI-Driven Discrimination and Disproportionate Impact on Black Women

Perhaps most alarming, the court revealed that DOGE used ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence programs to scan and flag grants for termination based on their perceived "diversity, equity, and inclusion" (DEI) content. This algorithmic approach had a devastating and disproportionate impact on Black women researchers and professionals. According to data cited in the ruling and supporting legal analyses, Black women made up approximately 12% of the federal workforce in early 2025 but accounted for 33% of the initial federal job cuts conducted by DOGE.

• 113,000 jobs lost: Between January and December 2025, Black women lost a net total of 113,000 federal positions.
• 30% decrease vs. 8.1%: Black women saw over a 30% decrease in federal employment compared to a much smaller 8.1% drop for men.
• Stark contrast: During the same period Black women lost over 300,000 jobs across public and private sectors, white men added 365,000 jobs—the largest increase among all groups.
• Grant termination disparities: Nearly half (48.6%) of investigators whose grants were terminated for "equity-related" reasons identified as BIPOC, with women losing 57.9% of their grant funds compared to 48.2% for men.

Economists note that these cuts hit Black women hardest because they are more highly concentrated in the federal agencies DOGE targeted most aggressively, such as the Department of Education and HUD, where Black workers make up 36% of the workforce—double their representation in the overall federal government. The National Women's Law Center and the Institute for Women's Policy Research have both released statements condemning what they describe as a coordinated attack on workplace equity and civil rights protections.

Constitutional Violations and Ongoing Legal Challenges

Judge McMahon's ruling specifically addressed the termination of research grants rather than employee layoffs, though it noted that DOGE had also issued "reduction-in-force" notices to approximately 75% of the NEH workforce—a matter that remains a subject of ongoing legal challenge. The court emphasized that the mass termination constituted "transparent viewpoint discrimination" and that the administration's attempts to reframe the cuts as fiscal responsibility were mere pretext for ideological targeting.

"Far be it from this Court to deny the right of the Administration to focus NEH priorities on American history and exceptionalism," Judge McMahon wrote. "But the Constitution does not permit the government to achieve those ends by systematically defunding research that mentions women, Black civil rights, or the Holocaust." The ruling permanently bars the Trump administration from enforcing these specific grant terminations and orders their full reinstatement, delivering a significant blow to DOGE's cost-cutting agenda and raising fundamental questions about the extent of executive authority over congressionally appropriated funds.