Federal judge orders Trump administration to cancel remaining taxpayer-funded ads featuring the president

A federal judge in Manhattan ordered the Trump administration Sunday evening to stop airing government-funded television ads that feature the president, and to cancel every remaining placement, including those booked for Sunday night.

U.S. District Judge Jennifer Rochon issued a temporary restraining order that took effect at 6:45 p.m. EDT on Oct. 11 and lasts 14 days unless extended. It is the first known time a judge has blocked the ad campaign, which has drawn multiple lawsuits.

What the order requires

Rochon directed the administration to "cancel or cause to be cancelled" any airing or dissemination of the challenged ads. She barred the government from spending Department of Homeland Security appropriations to "develop, create, disseminate, place, distribute, publish, or air" them.

She also barred the administration from entering into, renewing or expanding any agreement for the ads during the order's life. And she stayed a purchase order between U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the contractor, Lepugh Inc., which does business as LMD Agency Inc.

The judge found the plaintiffs likely to succeed on the merits, likely to suffer irreparable harm without relief, and that an injunction serves the public interest. She said a full opinion will follow.

The money

The ads were paid for with funds earmarked for immigration enforcement. DHS allocated $20 million for the campaign, and about $19 million has been spent. The money came from a $175 million package Congress gave the department for President Trump's immigration agenda.

The ads began airing in late September, weeks before the November midterms. They carry the caption "Paid for by the U.S. Government." One overlays Trump clips with quotes from recent speeches denouncing communism and crediting himself with the largest tax cuts in history. Another closely replicates a spot Trump ran in his 2024 campaign.

The lawsuit

The case was brought by Common Cause, a labor union in New York and its political action committee, and Robert Hunter, a Democratic candidate for the Alabama state House. They are represented by Democracy Forward. The Democratic National Committee and its Wisconsin affiliate have filed separate suits.

The plaintiffs argue the administration unlawfully repurposed money Congress appropriated for something else, and that the spending is taxpayer-funded "political propaganda." Legal experts have said the spending may violate a federal ban on using appropriated money for "publicity or propaganda."

In a statement, the plaintiffs said, "There is no legal justification — and no precedent — for the president to use the machinery of the government and funds set aside by Congress for other uses to influence electoral outcomes that further his own agenda."

The government's position

The administration told the court the plaintiffs lacked standing, had sued in the wrong venue, and faced no irreparable harm because the campaign was ending Sunday. The Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office, which is defending the case, argued in a late Saturday filing that a restraining order was unnecessary because "the alleged offending conduct will end tomorrow."

Holly Mehringer, who is performing the duties of DHS's chief financial officer, told the court the money came from funds Congress made "available for, among other things, 'commemorating efforts and events related to border security.'" She said DHS directed the vendor to make no media buys past Oct. 11 and expects a final invoice.

The White House has defended the spots as public service announcements, like those past administrations ran to promote policies. Yet the filing did not make that case on the merits. The plaintiffs seized on that gap, saying the defendants "admit that appropriated funds were used to pay for political ads and do not dispute that this use of taxpayer money is unlawful."

Rochon rejected the mootness argument. The plaintiffs had noted the government itself said ads would still run Sunday night, in programming drawing millions of viewers. She also rejected the standing challenge. Rochon was appointed by President Biden.

What comes next

The DHS declaration is the government's account of why the money was available. The order does not yet come with a written opinion setting out the judge's full reasoning on that question.

Trump said last week that MAGA Inc., the political group supporting him, would help fund the ads going forward. MAGA Inc. did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the ruling. As described, the order restricts DHS-appropriated funds, and it is not clear from the order how it applies to privately funded airings.

The restraining order runs two weeks from Sunday evening unless extended. Rochon's written opinion, and any move by the plaintiffs to seek a longer injunction, will determine whether the ad dispute outlasts the campaign it targets. The DNC's separate suits remain pending.