DOGE officials conducting vital government waste reduction are under fire from leftist academics furious that taxpayer-funded grants promoting divisive DEI agendas have been eliminated using innovative AI tools to identify inappropriate spending.
Story Snapshot
- Two DOGE staffers used ChatGPT to identify DEI-related grants at the National Endowment for the Humanities, fulfilling Trump’s executive order to eliminate divisive federal funding
- Academic associations released deposition videos in an apparent attempt to embarrass officials who cut grants focused on race, gender, and LGBTQ+ topics rather than universal humanities projects
- Justin Fox and Nathan Cavanaugh testified they prioritized deficit reduction over special interest programming, showing no regret for implementing Trump’s mandate
- Leftist media portrays the cuts as reckless, but the officials were following direct presidential orders to eliminate wasteful DEI spending from federal agencies
DOGE Officials Execute Presidential Mandate on DEI Grants
Justin Fox and Nathan Cavanaugh, staffers working with the Department of Government Efficiency, implemented President Trump’s January 2025 executive order banning DEI initiatives in federal funding. The two officials reviewed National Endowment for the Humanities grants using ChatGPT prompts to identify projects containing DEI-related content. Fox, earning $150,000, and Cavanaugh, earning $120,000, flagged grants referencing terms like “Black,” “homosexual,” and other identity-focused language. Their work directly fulfilled the administration’s directive to eliminate taxpayer funding for divisive programs that promote race and gender ideology over merit-based humanities research.
Academic Establishment Retaliates Through Selective Video Release
The Modern Language Association, American Council of Learned Societies, and American Historical Association filed lawsuits challenging the grant cuts and strategically released deposition videos in March 2026. These groups positioned Fox and Cavanaugh as unqualified operatives, highlighting moments where they struggled to articulate precise DEI definitions beyond the executive order’s framework. MLA executive director Paula Krebs accused the officials of “haphazard and unlawful actions,” claiming they denied “vital public programming.” The released footage appears carefully edited to maximize embarrassment, focusing on statements where Fox admitted he couldn’t recall specific executive order details and Cavanaugh’s blunt assessments of grants he considered inappropriate uses of taxpayer funds.
Media Distorts Legitimate Government Efficiency Efforts
Leftist outlets portrayed the depositions as exposing reckless incompetence, but the testimony actually reveals officials doing exactly what Trump voters elected him to accomplish. Fox and Cavanaugh flagged over 24 grants related to LGBTQ+ topics and numerous projects centered on race-based narratives rather than universal historical scholarship. When questioned about regrets, Cavanaugh stated it was “more important to reduce the deficit” than preserve funding for special interest programming. Fox similarly prioritized “reducing government spend” over accommodating critics. These responses reflect common-sense fiscal conservatism, not the callousness portrayed by hostile media. The officials used available technology to efficiently process large volumes of grant applications against clear presidential directives.
Grants Targeted Divisive Content Over Universal Humanities
The flagged grants included projects on Black civil rights movements, Holocaust experiences through identity lenses, feminist and queer studies, and LGBTQ+ military service history. Critics claim these represent legitimate humanities scholarship, but conservatives recognize them as vehicles for advancing progressive political agendas under academic cover. The Trump administration’s executive order specifically targeted such programs because they divide Americans by race, gender, and sexual orientation rather than promoting shared cultural heritage. Fox and Cavanaugh’s work identified grants that failed to serve broad public interests, instead catering to narrow activist constituencies. Their ChatGPT methodology efficiently separated merit-based historical research from ideologically driven projects that previous administrations rubber-stamped without scrutiny.
Constitutional Concerns and Government Overreach Under Biden
The lawsuit alleging separation of powers violations misses the fundamental issue: Biden-era agencies routinely funded programs that pushed divisive ideologies contrary to American unity and traditional values. The NEH became a conduit for left-wing activism dressed as scholarship, distributing taxpayer money to projects that undermined rather than celebrated American heritage. DOGE’s intervention restores accountability by ensuring federal funds support genuinely educational programming accessible to all citizens, not grievance-based narratives targeting specific identity groups. The academic associations’ outrage confirms they view federal grants as entitlements for their ideological allies rather than competitive awards requiring public benefit justification. Their legal challenge represents establishment resistance to draining the swamp of politically motivated spending.
Sources:
DOGE Bros Depositions Reveal ChatGPT Process for Gutting ‘DEI’ Grants
I Watched 6 Hours of DOGE Bro Testimony. Here’s What They Had to Say for Themselves
