Actual court document [0]. The topic of grant funding under the Trump Administration has gotten some significant discussion on HN over the last year, such as (chronologically):
And there has been plenty of speculation around abuse or observation of abuse. That said I think it's significant that they've actually admitted to it directly as a stipulation filed in federal court. From the linked document, point 9:
>9. DOE accepts that the inclusion of grants in the October notice tranche was based solely
on the political identity of the grant recipient’s state, i.e., whether the recipient’s location and/or place of performance was in a Blue State or a non-Blue State. DOE will not
contend that it looked beyond the prime grantee(s) to consider the political identity or
geographic distribution of downstream beneficiaries of the grant funds.
Perhaps this will allow some further challenges even though a lot of the harm at this point is baked in permanently.
xoa•40m ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44755429 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44832829 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46355077 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48331511
And there has been plenty of speculation around abuse or observation of abuse. That said I think it's significant that they've actually admitted to it directly as a stipulation filed in federal court. From the linked document, point 9:
>9. DOE accepts that the inclusion of grants in the October notice tranche was based solely on the political identity of the grant recipient’s state, i.e., whether the recipient’s location and/or place of performance was in a Blue State or a non-Blue State. DOE will not contend that it looked beyond the prime grantee(s) to consider the political identity or geographic distribution of downstream beneficiaries of the grant funds.
Perhaps this will allow some further challenges even though a lot of the harm at this point is baked in permanently.
----
0: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.45...