WASHINGTON — The White House is proposing a far-reaching rewrite of the rules on federal grants, consolidating its power over who benefits from federal financial assistance and what they can do with that money.

A 412-page proposal published Thursday by the Office of Management and Budget could be the biggest overhaul of how the federal government distributes assistance in decades. Agencies distribute more than $1 trillion a year in research grants, support for local governments and small businesses and farm subsidies.

The White House said the changes were necessary to prevent wasteful spending, and cites a litany of ideological objections to grant-funded projects. Under President Joe Biden’s administration, OMB said, federal grants were used “to promote a ‘woke’ policy agenda that did not reflect the values of the vast majority of the American public.”

The proposal would give agencies broad authority to halt awards if they determine a grant no longer serves program goals, agency priorities or the national interest — similar to “termination for convenience” provisions included in many federal contracts.

President Donald Trump’s administration attempted to freeze thousands of grants in its first days in office, but quickly reversed course once lawsuits piled up and politically popular local assistance programs — including those for law enforcement — were caught in the crossfire.

The new proposal appears designed to fix that chaotic process spurred into action by Elon Musk’s short-lived Department of Government Efficiency effort.

Grant recipients have succeeded in getting many of those early grant cancellations overturned in court. The new proposal could be a way for the Trump administration to shore up its legal position to go after those grants again.

“The courts have said they cannot revoke and terminate the grants based on universities not complying with their political requirements,” said Aaron Nisenson, senior counsel for the American Association of University Professors, which has filed or joined at least 11 lawsuits against Trump policies.

“So what they’re doing is they’re advancing 10 or 15 or 20 or 50 different reasons that they could revoke a grant. And they’ll say, well, it’s one of those reasons. It’s not for a political reason,” he said.

The system would put senior Trump political appointees in charge of screening grant proposals, institute new reviews for foreign connections by recipients and impose new requirements for free speech.

For example, colleges and universities receiving federal grants would be prohibited from making controversial campus speakers pay security costs that critics call “heckler’s fees.”

Federal grant recipients would also be barred from instituting diversity, equity and inclusion policies, gender transition services or voter-registration drives. The rule would require grant materials to be written in English, and recipients would need to pass E-Verify screening of their immigration status.

Georges C. Benjamin, CEO of the American Public Health Association, said he’s still analyzing the proposal but said it appeared to be a “political power grab.”

“They are cherry-picking reports, distorting the facts and confounding diversity, equity and inclusion with reverse discrimination. DEI is legal, ethical and in line with the principles espoused in the US Constitution and several amendments,” he said.

The proposal has a 45-day comment period before a target implementation date of Oct. 1, 2026.

_____

©2026 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.