In the NEH grant-termination lawsuit, the Authors Guild and co-plaintiffs filed summary judgment materials arguing that DOGE - not NEH leadership - drove which humanities grants got cut, including using ChatGPT to flag projects tied to DEI-related keywords without clear safeguards. They say that process targeted viewpoint and protected characteristics, and that Congress never gave DOGE authority over NEH awards.
For writers and scholars on those grants, the filing is the factual core of a First Amendment and equal-protection fight, not a policy blog post. The Guild is asking the court to vacate terminations and bar repeat behavior; members get the blow-by-blow because many livelihoods and institutions hang on restored NEH funding.
(Shortened and summarised to avoid devaluing the source)