Judge Rules DOGE Used ChatGPT Illegally to Cancel $100M in Grants
Key Takeaways
- A federal judge ruled DOGE's grant cancellations unconstitutional, restoring over $100 million in humanities funding
- DOGE staffers used ChatGPT to scan grants for DEI-related terms without defining what DEI meant to the AI
- Staffers created 'Detection Codes' targeting protected characteristics including race, national origin, and sexuality
A federal judge has ruled that the Department of Government Efficiency acted unconstitutionally when it used ChatGPT to identify and cancel more than $100 million in federal grants. The 143-page decision, issued Thursday by US District Judge Colleen McMahon, found that DOGE staff used the AI chatbot to target grants based on protected characteristics like race, national origin, religion, and sexuality.
The ruling restores funding for grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities that were shut down under the pretense of eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.
How DOGE Used ChatGPT to Flag Grants
The court filing details testimony from Justin Fox, a DOGE staffer who worked with colleague Nate Cavanaugh to eliminate 97 percent of grants under the NEH. Fox testified that he submitted each grant description to ChatGPT using a standardized prompt.
“Does the following relate at all to DEI? Respond factually in less than 120 characters. Begin with 'Yes.' or 'No.' followed by a brief explanation.”
— Justin Fox's ChatGPT prompt, as cited in court filing
Fox admitted under oath that he did not define "DEI" for ChatGPT. He also testified that he had no idea how the AI system understood the term. The chatbot was essentially making consequential funding decisions based on its own interpretation of a politically charged acronym.
The 'Detection Codes' System
Beyond the ChatGPT prompts, Fox created what he called "Detection Codes" to identify grants he labeled "Craziest Grants" and "Other Bad Grants." These search terms targeted specific demographic groups.
- BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color)
- Minorities
- Native, Tribal, Indigenous
- Immigrant
- LGBTQ, Homosexual, Gay
When asked whether he ran this list of words through every grant description from NEH, Fox confirmed "yes." Judge McMahon wrote that Fox "constructed and applied explicit classifications based on protected characteristics and used them as the operative criteria for revoking federal grants."
The Constitutional Problem
Judge McMahon's ruling found that using protected characteristics as criteria for federal funding decisions violates constitutional equal protection principles. The court wrote that "it could not be more obvious that DOGE used the mere presence of particular, protected characteristics to disqualify grants from continued funding."
The lawsuit was originally filed in 2025 by humanities groups affected by the grant cancellations. Thursday's ruling represents a significant legal setback for DOGE's approach to cutting federal spending through AI-assisted reviews.
What This Means for AI in Government
The case highlights the risks of deploying AI tools for high-stakes government decisions without proper oversight or methodology. Fox's testimony reveals a process with no clear definitions, no human review of ChatGPT's reasoning, and no consideration of whether the AI's outputs were legally sound.
Using a consumer chatbot to make $100 million funding decisions, while admitting you don't know how the AI interprets key terms, is now documented in a federal court ruling as both ineffective and unconstitutional.
Logicity's Take
Another case of technology governance failures in critical systems
Context on the scale of AI investment versus governance maturity
Frequently Asked Questions
What grants did DOGE cancel using ChatGPT?
DOGE canceled over $100 million in grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities, eliminating 97% of the agency's grants based on ChatGPT scans for DEI-related content.
Why was DOGE's use of ChatGPT ruled unconstitutional?
The court found that DOGE used protected characteristics like race, national origin, religion, and sexuality as criteria for canceling grants, which violates constitutional equal protection principles.
What were the 'Detection Codes' DOGE used?
DOGE staffer Justin Fox created search terms targeting demographic groups including BIPOC, Minorities, Native, Tribal, Indigenous, Immigrant, LGBTQ, Homosexual, and Gay to flag grants for elimination.
Can government agencies use AI for funding decisions?
This ruling suggests agencies must ensure AI tools don't make decisions based on protected characteristics. Using undefined prompts in consumer chatbots without human review creates significant legal risk.
Need Help Implementing This?
Huma Shazia
Senior AI & Tech Writer
Related Articles
Browse all
Robotaxi Companies Are Hiding How Often Humans Take the Wheel
Autonomous vehicle firms like Waymo and Tesla are under scrutiny for refusing to disclose how often remote operators step in to control their self-driving cars. A Senate investigation reveals major gaps in transparency, raising safety and accountability concerns.
Wisconsin Governor Throws a Wrench in Age Verification Plans
Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers has vetoed a bill that would have required residents to verify their age before accessing adult content online, citing concerns over privacy and data security. This move comes as several other states have already implemented similar age check requirements. The veto has significant implications for the future of online age verification.
Apple's App Store Empire Under Siege: The Battle for the Future of Tech
The long-running feud between Apple and Epic Games has reached a boiling point, with Apple preparing to take its case to the Supreme Court. The tech giant is fighting to maintain control over its App Store, while Epic Games is pushing for more freedom for developers. The outcome could have far-reaching implications for the entire tech industry.
Tesla's Remote Parking Feature: The Investigation That Didn't Quite Park Itself
The US auto safety regulators have closed their investigation into Tesla's remote parking feature, but what does this mean for the future of autonomous driving? We dive into the details of the investigation and what it reveals about the technology. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration found that crashes were rare and minor, but the investigation's closure doesn't necessarily mean the feature is completely safe.
Also Read
Pentagon Releases 161 Declassified UFO Files With 30 Videos
The Pentagon published its first batch of declassified UAP files on May 8, responding to President Trump's February directive. The release includes 161 files with nearly 30 videos showing unidentified objects captured by military sensors, plus eyewitness accounts from Apollo astronauts.
How to Clear Old Windows Drivers Wasting Your SSD Space
Windows stores every driver you've ever installed but never cleans up old versions. This hidden folder can grow to 30GB on gaming PCs. Here's how to safely reclaim that space.
Diablo 4 Gold Bug Gives Players 900% Boost
A Horadric seal item in Diablo 4: Lord of Hatred is giving players a 900% gold bonus. This appears to be a decimal point error. Players are exploiting it to earn billions of gold per hour before Blizzard patches it.