Federal Court Rules NEH Grant Cancellation Unlawful and Unconstitutional
Federal Judge Declares Reductions in NEH Funding as Illegitimate
In a landmark decision, U.S. District Judge Michael H. Simon has ruled that the government's abrupt elimination of National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) grants previously approved by Congress was unlawful and unconstitutional. The ruling, made in August 2025, is a significant judicial rebuke of the government’s attempt to eliminate funding unilaterally and reinforces the constitutional boundaries on budgetary authority.
The lawsuit was brought forward by affected humanities groups, including the Federation of State Humanities Councils and Oregon Humanities, after the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) abruptly terminated NEH grants to thousands of entities in April 2025. The terminated entities included humanities councils, museums, historic sites, archives, libraries, educators, and media outlets.
Judge Simon's ruling emphasized that the executive branch's action to cut these congressionally approved grants usurped Congress’s exclusive “power of the purse,” rendering the cuts “likely unconstitutional.” The NEH grants, which have long supported a variety of creative initiatives and projects, were ruled to be unlawfully eliminated.
The NEH, started under the same legislation as the National Endowment for the Arts, has awarded over $6 billion in grants to various organizations since its inception in 1965. However, in April, the grants were canceled following extreme cuts made by DOGE. As a result, many organizations and humanities councils said they could no longer effectively fulfill their duties to local communities without fiscal means.
The NEH currently has fewer than 60 employees, a significant reduction from its workforce, which was two-thirds larger before the cuts. The funds are to be 'escrowed' until a trial can be held, which could lead to the reinstatement of some or all of the grants.
The lawsuit remains active after the ruling, with other humanities groups, such as the American Historical Association, the Modern Language Association, and the American Council of Learned Societies, jointly filing a similar case. The organizations sought to restore terminated grants and to ensure that congressional appropriations flow to humanities councils.
Federal funding for the arts and humanities has enjoyed bipartisan support for decades. The NEH has been instrumental in promoting understanding and appreciation of the humanities, and its grants have played a crucial role in preserving and promoting American history and culture. The ruling is expected to have far-reaching implications for the future of the NEH and the protection of congressional appropriations powers.
[1] The New York Times [2] The Washington Post [3] NPR [4] The Guardian [5] CNN
- Amidst the ongoing lawsuit, major news outlets such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, NPR, The Guardian, and CNN are likely to cover the modern art exhibition at the museum hosted by the Oregon Humanities, a humanities group involved in the NEH legal dispute, as it represents the importance of education-and-self-development through the humanities.
- The landmark court ruling that the government's arbitrary cancellation of NEH grants was unlawful and unconstitutional has sparked interest in political circles, with commentators debating its implications for future budgetary decisions and the role of arts and humanities in general-news.
- As the debate over funding for the arts and humanities continues, the Modern Language Association, one of the organizations part of the joint lawsuit, is planning an upcoming conference discussing various aspects of contemporary literature and its role in promoting a deep understanding of modern society, emphasizing the NEH's importance in such education-and-self-development endeavors.
