Authors Guild Warns NEA Grant Applicants: Hold Off on Compliance Amid Legal Uncertainty

Federal Orders Targeting DEI and “Gender Ideology” Face Legal Hurdles

Recent executive orders signed by the current administration in January 2025 have thrown the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) grant process into turmoil, leaving many authors and arts organizations unsure of how to proceed. The orders, which aim to eliminate funding for programs promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and restrict content deemed to support “gender ideology,” have raised serious constitutional concerns.

Now, the Authors Guild is advising NEA grantees and applicants to pause before complying with the new regulations, as a federal judge has already issued a preliminary injunction blocking key aspects of the orders.

New Regulations Spark Confusion and Legal Battles

The executive orders, signed on January 20 and 21, mandate that federal grant recipients confirm their projects do not violate new restrictions, which are broadly defined and open to interpretation. The NEA updated its website to reflect these changes, requiring grant applicants to certify that they:

• Will comply with all executive orders while their grant is active.
• Will follow federal anti-discrimination laws as required under Executive Order 14173.
• Will not run DEI-related programs that allegedly violate federal laws.
• Will not use federal funds to promote “gender ideology” as outlined in Executive Order 14168.

Adding to the uncertainty, NEA director Michelle Hoffman admitted in a February 18 webinar that the agency is still determining how the orders will impact recommended applications and open awards. Despite the legal challenges, grant applicants are currently required to sign an “assurance of compliance,” a move the Authors Guild believes is legally unsound.

Court Ruling: Free Speech at Risk

On February 21, Judge Adam B. Abelson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland granted a preliminary injunction against parts of the orders, particularly those targeting DEI initiatives. The ruling deemed the provisions “vague” and a violation of free speech, noting that federal law has long recognized the importance of promoting diversity and inclusion.

The judge further argued that the orders create uncertainty for federal contractors and grant recipients, many of whom are now unsure whether their existing work could suddenly be deemed noncompliant. He wrote, “The Termination Provision leaves contractors and employees, plus any other recipients of federal grants, with no idea whether the administration will deem their contracts or grants, or work they are doing, or speech they are engaged in, to be ‘equity-related.’”

In addition, the ruling found that threats of enforcement against grant recipients raise significant constitutional concerns.

Authors Guild: “Unconstitutional and Unenforceable”

The Authors Guild, the nation’s leading advocacy group for writers, strongly opposes the executive orders. President Mary Rasenberger criticized the NEA’s new compliance requirements, calling them “likely unenforceable due to their vagueness and clear constitutional violations.”

She emphasized that while the preliminary injunction offers some relief, the situation remains in flux. The Guild is urging authors and organizations applying for NEA grants to wait before signing any compliance certifications, as legal challenges could further dismantle the orders.

“Things are very much in flux right now,” Rasenberger stated. “But we feel that the DEI executive order as implemented by the NEA is unconstitutional. There is really clear Supreme Court precedent.”

Unanswered Questions on “Gender Ideology” Clause

While the DEI-related provisions have been temporarily blocked, questions remain about the enforcement of restrictions on “gender ideology.”

Rasenberger raised concerns about the vague and undefined language used in the executive orders. “What does it even mean?” she asked. “Can you certify that a project does not promote ‘gender ideology’ based on your own interpretation of the law?” She pointed out that applicants are not legal experts, making it unclear how they are supposed to navigate these new restrictions.

What’s Next for NEA Applicants?

With the NEA’s grant deadline for authors approaching on March 12, the Authors Guild recommends that applicants hold off on compliance until more legal clarity emerges. The organization expects the NEA to receive further guidance from the Biden administration in the coming weeks and is planning a webinar to help authors navigate the evolving situation.

For now, the best course of action for grant applicants is to stay informed, avoid unnecessary risks, and wait for further developments in the legal battle over these controversial executive orders.