Federal judge prevented US President Donald Trump’s government to defame art organizations that are considered to promote “gender ideology” when they decide who should receive grants from the National Arts Foundation (EIT).

In accordance with Reutersthe US Regional Judge, William SmithIn Probindens, Rhodes Island, he considered that the policy adopted by the EIT to implement an executive decree signed by Trump was illegal and violated the protection of freedom of speech provided for in the first amendment of the US Constitution.

Smith, appointed by the Republican President George Bushstated that politics unfairly limits the word of artists because “It attributes a negative weight to the expression of certain ideas on the issue of gender identity.”

The decision was taken after a lawsuit filed by four art and theater organizations represented by the US Association of Civil Liberty in March, after demanding that the applicants grant to certify that they would not promote “gender ideology”.

EIT adopted these criteria according to an executive decree signed by the Republican president on his return for his second term on January 20, which stipulated that the government had to recognize only two sexes – Male and female – and required the services to ensure that grant funds do not promote what he called “gender ideology”.

The plaintiffs said that EIT’s policy would force them to self -censor to receive funding and change the scope of artistic works that include trans or LGBTKI+ actors.

Following the lawsuit, EIT canceled its original policy on “gender ideology” and announced that it would re -implement Trump’s executive decree through a young man who adopted April 30.

According to the new policy, EIT president will evaluate grant applications “For artistic excellence and value, including whether the proposed work promotes gender ideology”, “as appropriate”.

While a project that is considered to promote “gender ideology” would not be deprived of funding solely on this basis, this decision could affect whether it would receive final approval, the government said.

Smith had concluded a previous opinion that EIT’s original policy was probably unconstitutional. In Friday’s decision, he said the latter arrangement constitutes an unconstitutional restriction of private discourse. He also said that the Statute of the Agency does not authorize its President to reject applications for specific opinions.