A Federal Judge Ruled That DOGE's Use of ChatGPT to Cancel Grants Was Both Unconstitutional and Bizarre

In a scathing 143-page decision released Thursday, U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon struck down the Department of Government Efficiency's cancellation of over $100 million in federal grants, ruling the process violated the First and Fifth Amendments. At the center of the ruling is DOGE's reliance on ChatGPT to determine which National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) grants were tied to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

According to testimony from DOGE staffer Justin Fox, he and colleague Nate Cavanaugh used 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." - to evaluate each grant description. Fox admitted he never defined DEI for the chatbot and had no idea how ChatGPT interpreted the term.

Fox also compiled a list of "Detection Codes" to flag grants, including terms like "BIPOC," "LGBTQ," "Indigenous," "Homosexual," and "Gay." He then ran every grant description through this keyword filter, effectively using protected characteristics as grounds for elimination. The judge noted that grants related to the Holocaust, civil rights, and Indigenous knowledge were among those canceled.

McMahon rejected the government's defense that ChatGPT, not human officials, was responsible for the classifications. "There is no distinction to be drawn here between the Government and ChatGPT," she wrote. "ChatGPT was the Government's chosen instrument."

The ruling restores more than 1,400 NEH grants and orders their immediate reinstatement, marking a significant legal boundary on using AI to automate government decisions that affect constitutional rights.

Source: The Verge