Hasn’t the world of federal funding been an exciting ride lately? Having navigated the maze of academic research and grant applications for years, I’ve witnessed my share of “red tape” and “budget shifts.” However, for many in the humanities, what transpired this past year felt unique and intimate.
The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) has been embroiled in a huge legal battle, as anyone who follows the news knows. This is a story about the marketplace of ideas that shapes our culture, not just spreadsheets and government line items.
We’re delving deeply into the reasons behind a judge’s decision to prevent the Trump administration from shutting down these essential resources, as well as the implications for American scholarship going forward.
Table of Contents
The Day the Music (and Funding) Stopped
I remember talking to a coworker in April 2025. She had just gotten an email that told her that years of work on her historical project, which was a deep dive into civil rights in the 1800s, were basically over. No warning, no phase-out. Just a note to let her know that her NEH grant was canceled.
This wasn’t a one-time thing. The NEH canceled more than 1,000 grants in a “mass cancellation” that was ordered by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). We’re talking about about $175 million that had already been promised to universities, museums, and individual researchers.
Why did the administration do it? A push to get rid of “waste” and “radical indoctrination,” with a focus on programs related to:
It seemed like the humanities had come to a “screeching halt.” Picture this: you build a house, put up the frame, and then the bank calls and says they’re taking back the loan because they don’t like the color of the curtains you might choose. To say the least, it was a mess.
The Legal Counterstrike: A Tale of Two Courts
When things calmed down, the legal community didn’t stay quiet. Two big decisions came out that changed the course. Judges in both Oregon and New York said, “Wait a minute.”
1. The New York Ruling: Protecting Free Speech
Judge Colleen McMahon of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York made history by issuing a preliminary injunction. This judge stops the NEH from canceling grants because, as she put it, the agency probably broke the First Amendment.
The court said that the administration wasn’t just “shifting priorities”; they were also discriminating against people based on their views. They were basically trying to “edit history” by choosing grants based on what they thought were their ideological content.McMahon said in her ruling that agency discretion does not include the right to break the First Amendment.
2. The Oregon Ruling: The Power of the Purse
In Portland, on the other hand, U.S. District Judge Michael H. Simon took a different but equally strong approach. He put a lot of emphasis on the Separation of Powers.
He reminded everyone that the Constitution gives Congress, not the President, the “power of the purse.” The executive branch couldn’t just take these funds back because Congress had already given them to them.
When the dust settled, the legal community didn’t stay quiet. Two major rulings emerged that shifted the tide. In both Oregon and New York, judges stepped in to say, “Hold on a minute.“
By the Numbers: The Impact of the Cuts
To give you an idea of the scale of this “humanities purge,” take a look at these stats:
| Category | Impact Detail |
| Total Funding Blocked | Approximately $175 Million |
| Grants Canceled | Over 1,000 projects across 48 states |
| Personnel Cuts | 65% of NEH staff received termination notices |
| Targeted Themes | DEI, Gender Studies, Environmental Justice, and Climate Change |
Why This Matters to You
You might be wondering, “Why should I care about a book grant for a book about the KKK in the 1970s or a digital archive of Catherine the Great?”
It’s like a library that everyone can use. You might not read every book on the shelf, but you want to know that the library isn’t burning books just because a new manager took over. The humanities are like the OS (Operating System) of our culture. They help us learn about our past and how to talk to each other.
When the government starts cutting funding based on opinions instead of merit, it sets a bad example that affects everything from arts programs in the community to scientific research. If a judge stops actions by the Trump administration here, it means that our system still has “guardrails.”
A Personal Journey: The Scholar’s Perspective
I do have a huge “knowledge base” that is based on the work of these scholars. A piece of the puzzle goes missing every time a project is canceled.
Through the data, I’ve seen this: the California teacher who lost a summer institute program and the Texas museum that had to stop reaching out to the community.
It reminds us that there is a person whose whole life was at stake behind every unconstitutional ruling.
The Road Ahead: What’s Next?
As we move through 2026, I will be keeping a close eye on these court dockets. After all, the story of our humanities is our story.
The injunctions are a symbolic victory (and a real one for those whose money is now “on pause”), but the fight isn’t over.
Last Thoughts
The story of the NEH grants is a great lesson in how the American government works. It shows us that the law is always changing and needs our attention. The marketplace of ideas is a loud, messy, and important part of our democracy, no matter what you think of the administration’s goals or the judges’ decisions.
I’ll be keeping a close eye on these court dockets as we move through 2026. After all, the story of our humanities is the story of us.
Additional Resources
If you’re looking to dive deeper into the legal nitty-gritty or see if your local institution was affected, check out these resources:
