Authors Guild Wins Key NEH Grant Ruling

Authors Guild Wins Key NEH Grant Ruling \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ A federal judge halted the cancellation of National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) grants, ruling the move likely violated the First Amendment rights of Authors Guild members. The court criticized government efforts to defund DEI-linked projects. The preliminary injunction maintains funding while a broader legal battle unfolds.

Quick Looks

• Judge Colleen McMahon issued a preliminary injunction preventing the U.S. government from canceling NEH grants
• The court ruled that terminating grants based on viewpoint or DEI content may violate First Amendment rights
• The Authors Guild filed a class-action suit in May after dozens of grants were rescinded
• Government cited executive orders targeting “Radical Indoctrination,” “DEI Programs,” and promoting “Biological Truth”
• Grants affected included one for a book on the 1970s–80s Ku Klux Klan resurgence
• A government spreadsheet tagged many canceled projects as DEI-linked
• The judge emphasized that “agency discretion does not include the right to edit history”
• The court blocked the reallocation of grant funds until a full trial is held
• The lawsuit also challenged the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) for halting NEH operations
• Mary Rasenberger, CEO of the Authors Guild, praised the court’s defense of constitutional rights
• Other organizations, including the American Historical Association and Modern Language Association, joined related lawsuits
• The American Council of Learned Societies was denied a temporary injunction but may pursue future claims
• This ruling marks a significant legal pushback against federal defunding of academic and cultural institutions

Deep Look

In a major ruling with broad implications for academic freedom and cultural funding, U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon blocked the Biden-to-Trump-era cancellation of federal grants awarded by the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). The decision halts what plaintiffs called politically motivated defunding and signals judicial resistance to viewpoint-based discrimination in grant-making.

The case stems from the sudden termination of dozens of grants, many connected to topics related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Judge McMahon’s opinion makes clear that the government appeared to target specific ideological content—actions she said violate First Amendment protections.

The Authors Guild, a leading advocate for writers’ rights, filed a class-action lawsuit in May against the NEH and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), the latter being part of a broader administrative restructuring effort aimed at streamlining or dissolving various federal bodies. The lawsuit charged that the abrupt halting of funding “brought the core work of humanities councils to a screeching halt.”

A key concern cited in the ruling was the rationale provided for the terminations. According to internal documentation referenced by the court, federal officials justified the cuts using executive orders that aimed to combat so-called “Radical Indoctrination” and “DEI Programs,” while promoting a politically charged agenda emphasizing “Biological Truth.” The ruling noted this language as evidence that content-based discrimination may have driven the decision to rescind funding.

Among the canceled grants was one awarded to a professor researching the Ku Klux Klan’s revival during the 1970s and 1980s—an area deemed controversial under the new policy lens. Other grants, particularly in the field of history and cultural studies, were flagged in a spreadsheet titled “Copy of NEH Active Grants” for their DEI alignment.

In her decision, Judge McMahon acknowledged that presidential administrations have broad latitude to shift policy priorities, particularly in funding decisions. However, she drew a firm line: “Agency discretion does not include discretion to violate the First Amendment. Nor does it give the government the right to edit history.”

She further criticized the fact that some recipients appeared to have been punished simply for having received grants under the Biden administration, raising concerns about retroactive political retaliation. The court’s order prevents the government from reallocating funds associated with the contested grants until the merits of the case are fully heard at trial.

Authors Guild CEO Mary Rasenberger hailed the ruling as a pivotal moment. “The decision is a heartening reminder that courts remain a bastion against government overreach and will step in to protect fundamental rights and liberties when they are blatantly threatened,” she said.

While the ruling provided partial relief, not all claims succeeded. The court denied a temporary injunction filed by the American Council of Learned Societies, which was joined by major academic organizations including the American Historical Association and the Modern Language Association. Their legal efforts may continue as the broader case proceeds.

This legal dispute is part of a growing national debate about how federal support for the arts, humanities, and education intersects with politics. The NEH, funded by Congress since 1965, has historically supported a wide range of research and cultural projects. The current clash reflects deeper ideological tensions about what kinds of narratives and histories deserve federal recognition.

With the preliminary injunction now in place, the status quo is restored—temporarily. A trial will ultimately decide the fate of the grants, the constitutionality of the cancellations, and the balance between executive authority and academic freedom.

More on US News

Authors Guild Wins Authors Guild Wins