ChatGPT Flagged Holocaust Education as DEI—Funding AXED

A lawsuit reveals how DOGE operatives used ChatGPT to slash over $100 million in NEH grants, flagging Holocaust education and Native American language preservation projects as “DEI” while operating outside legal authority and potentially violating constitutional protections.

Story Snapshot

DOGE staffers used ChatGPT to categorize grants with keywords like “Jewish,” “LGBTQ,” and “Tribal” as DEI-related, cutting funding to Holocaust education and Native American preservation projects
Over $100 million in NEH grants terminated in just 22 days, representing 97% of the agency’s pipeline, while 65% of staff were eliminated
DOGE operated without congressional authority, used disappearing Signal messages violating federal records law, and awarded $10 million to a single conservative organization after the cuts
Lawsuit depositions show NEH leaders disagreed with many classifications and were unaware of the AI-driven process overriding their authority

Rapid-Fire Grant Terminations Using Artificial Intelligence

Justin Fox, a DOGE Small Agencies Team member from the General Services Administration, led a ChatGPT-powered operation that terminated approximately 1,500 NEH grants between March and April 2025. Fox created prompts instructing the AI to flag projects “focused on Jewish cultures,” LGBTQ topics, or tribal communities as DEI-related. The process swept up Holocaust documentation, Italian American archives, Appalachian photography collections, and Native American language preservation initiatives. NEH Acting Chair Michael McDonald testified he disagreed with classifying Holocaust projects as DEI but was overridden by DOGE operatives who made final termination decisions despite lacking congressional authority over grant administration.

Constitutional Concerns and Federal Records Violations

The American Historical Association, Authors Guild, Modern Language Association, and American Council of Learned Societies filed suit alleging constitutional violations and unlawful federal overreach. Discovery documents reveal DOGE staffers communicated via Signal’s disappearing messages, directly violating the Federal Records Act’s requirement to preserve government communications. The lawsuit argues the keyword-based approach constitutes viewpoint discrimination under the First and Fifth Amendments, noting that terms like “white” or “heterosexual” were never searched. This selective targeting of minority-focused scholarship raises serious equal protection questions that should concern anyone who values constitutional limits on government power to punish disfavored viewpoints.

Questionable Authority and Post-Cut Favoritism

DOGE’s authority to override NEH decision-making remains disputed, as the efficiency task force established by President Trump lacks congressional authorization to terminate grants or direct agency operations. Depositions show Fox and colleagues made termination decisions via non-government email accounts without defining what constituted DEI content. Authors Guild CEO Mary Rasenberger described the process as “ridiculous,” saying participants were “kids being told just go in and cut as much as you can” without clear instructions. The haphazard approach resulted in non-DEI grants, including HVAC infrastructure upgrades, being swept into terminations alongside legitimately questionable expenditures.

Selective Post-Termination Funding Raises Eyebrows

After eliminating $100 million in grants supporting diverse humanities projects across schools, libraries, and community organizations, NEH awarded $10 million through a single-source contract to the Tikvah Fund, a conservative Jewish organization. This post-cuts favoritism occurred while Holocaust education grants were simultaneously being flagged as DEI and terminated. The contrast between broad-based terminations using AI keyword searches and concentrated awards to ideologically aligned recipients illustrates concerns about whether the process served genuine efficiency goals or political preferences. While trimming wasteful Biden-era spending aligns with conservative fiscal priorities, the methods revealed in depositions suggest a chaotic process lacking the rigor and constitutional safeguards Americans expect.

The lawsuit seeks reinstatement of terminated grants and has filed for summary judgment to avoid trial. As of March 2026, the case awaits a federal judge’s ruling on whether DOGE’s rapid intervention constituted lawful efficiency reform or unconstitutional government overreach. The outcome will determine whether over $100 million in humanities funding is restored and could set precedent for how future administrations balance executive authority against separation of powers principles that protect Americans from arbitrary government action.