DOGE Bros Used ChatGPT To Gut DEI, But Couldn’t Define It

Two former employees of the now-defunct Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Nathan Cavanaugh and Justin Fox — now infamously known as the “DOGE bros” online — are facing intense scrutiny after newly released deposition testimony revealed the controversial process used to eliminate federal grants tied to diversity programs and crucial initiatives.

The testimonies, recorded back in January, became public as part of a motion for summary judgment filed March 6, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in a lawsuit brought forth by the Modern Language Association, the American Council of Learned Societies, and the American Historical Association.

The groups allege that DOGE used a flawed process, including reliance on ChatGPT, to identify programs related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), and recommend terminating grants awarded by the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH).

The depositions paint a troubling picture of how decisions impacting cultural preservation, historical scholarship, and marginalized communities were made.

No government experience — but sweeping authority.

According to their testimony, neither Fox nor Cavanaugh had prior experience working in government or in grant administration before joining DOGE.

Despite that, they were tasked with reviewing thousands of NEH grants and determining whether they conflicted with an executive order from Donald Trump targeting DEI programs across federal agencies or if they were an example of wasteful spending.

Fox admitted that he used ChatGPT to screen grant descriptions for keywords related to diversity initiatives before deciding whether to cut them.

He explained that he and team members reviewed each grant and, for the sake of efficiency, pulled out the key phrases and layered on top their “view” of how some grants might conflict with Trump’s executive order dismantling DEI programs.

Fox also testified that he was never instructed by superiors to use ChatGPT but independently decided to use the tool to help evaluate the grants.

The lawsuit claims DOGE staff fed grant descriptions into ChatGPT and used the chatbot’s responses to compile a spreadsheet identifying which projects should be flagged as DEI-related and ultimately terminated. Some had no connection to DEI, the lawsuit claimed.

Projects reportedly cut after being flagged included a documentary about Jewish women forced into slave labor during the Holocaust and an archival project documenting Italian American communities.

The lawsuit also alleges that grants were flagged as DEI simply because they contained words such as “BIPOC,” “homosexual,” “LGBTQ,” or “Tribal,” raising concerns that the review process may have violated the Fifth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.

A Black Civil Rights documentary targeted.

One of the most contentious moments in Fox’s deposition came when he explained why a documentary about Black civil rights was flagged as violating the executive order.

“It is not for the benefit of humankind,” said Fox, who was an associate at a private equity firm before joining DOGE. “It is focused on this specific group, or a specific race, here being Black,” he said.

When pressed by an attorney about why a documentary about Black history wouldn’t benefit humanity broadly, Fox attempted to clarify.

“That’s not what I’m saying,” he said. “The way that I phrased it, there wasn’t exactly what I meant. 

He clarified that the project was “focused on a specific subset of race, and therefore it relates to DEI.” However, when the attorney asked him to define DEI, Fox struggled to give a clear answer.

Barely coming up with a cohesive answer, he said his understanding came largely from Trump’s executive order targeting diversity programs.

But he couldn’t “remember” what was in it.

Holocaust documentary also flagged.

Fox also faced questions about why a project examining Jewish women forced into slave labor during the Holocaust was flagged as DEI-related.

Asked about the decision, he said:

“It’s the gender-based story that’s inherently discriminatory to focus on this specific group.”

When pressed on what he meant by discriminatory, Fox added:

“It’s focusing on DEI principles. Gender being one of them.”

LGBTQ and AIDS activism projects targeted.

Cavanaugh’s testimony revealed that other grants were flagged simply for referencing LGBTQ history or activism. One project he reviewed focused on the history of HIV/AIDS activism and prison abolition, which he and Fox deemed as one of the  “craziest” grants. 

When asked why by the attorney, he explained:

“It references feminist and queer insights into prison abolition and LGBTQ studies.”

Another proposal — a public discussion series titled “Examining experiences of LGBTQ military service” — was also recommended for termination.

When asked why it had been flagged, Cavanaugh responded bluntly:

“Because it explicitly says LGBTQ.”

No prior experience with grant reviewing.

Another surprising moment in the deposition came when attorneys asked whether DOGE staff consulted experts or academic sources while evaluating humanities grants.

Cavanaugh admitted that they had not consulted scholars or specialists in the relevant fields and had no peer-review or grant experience.

“I think a person can have enough judgment from reading books and being well-informed outside of traditional experience to make judgment calls about obvious things like a grant that literally lists DEI in its description,” Cavanaugh said in his deposition.

But when attorneys asked which books informed those judgments, he admitted:

“There were no books,” he said.

Little remorse for the fallout, DOGE Bros said.

The grant cuts have drawn backlash from academics and cultural institutions who say the decisions jeopardized important historical and cultural preservation projects.

Per the Independent, Fox said he was paid $150,000 for his work at DOGE, while Cavanaugh earned $120,000.

When asked whether he felt remorse for the scholars and organizations affected, Fox said:

“Sorry for those impacted, but there is a bigger problem, and that’s ultimately — the more important piece is reducing the government spend.”

He described the cuts as a “necessary step in the right direction.”

When asked whether he felt any remorse that the DOGE cuts may have affected people’s income, Cavanaugh said he did not regret them.

“I think it was more important to reduce the federal deficit from $2 trillion to close to zero.”

SEE MORE:

DOGE Cuts Kill Georgia Internet Access Program For Black People

Now That He’s Done Ruining America, Elon Musk Is Leaving Politics