Judge Orders Halt to Taxpayer-Funded Trump TV Ads
A 14-day order blocks further spending and cancels ad placements in a lawsuit joined by an Alabama House candidate
TL;DR: A federal judge ordered the Trump administration to cancel remaining taxpayer-funded television ads promoting the president. The temporary order freezes further payments while a lawsuit with an Alabama plaintiff moves forward.
A federal judge Sunday ordered the Trump administration to cancel remaining taxpayer-funded television ads promoting President Donald Trump, granting emergency relief in a lawsuit joined by an Alabama State House candidate.
U.S. District Judge Jennifer L. Rochon, of the Southern District of New York, issued a 14-day temporary restraining order on October 11. It requires the administration to cancel scheduled broadcasts, including placements that evening, and bars further Homeland Security spending on the challenged ads.
In her four-page order, Rochon found that the plaintiffs were “likely to succeed on the merits” and would suffer harm that could not be repaired without immediate court action. She said a fuller opinion would follow.
The ruling also freezes future payments under the advertising contract and the $20 million funding allocation behind it. The administration must submit a report within 24 hours confirming compliance. The order can be extended, but it is an early ruling rather than a final judgment on the lawsuit.
The administration had argued that court action was unnecessary because the campaign was ending. In a Saturday filing, the Justice Department said “the alleged offending conduct will end tomorrow,” according to the Associated Press. Rochon nevertheless found that the dispute remained live and ordered the remaining placements canceled.
The case has a direct Alabama tie. Robert Hunter, the Democratic nominee for Alabama House District 28, joined Common Cause, SEIU Local 32BJ and the union’s Empire State political action committee in bringing the suit.
Their complaint alleges that federal officials shifted $20 million into a fund for border-related commemorative events, then used it to purchase political advertising. The plaintiffs contend that the spending exceeded what Congress authorized and violated limits on government-funded propaganda. Those claims remain before the court.
As ALPolitics.com previously reported, Hunter faces Republican incumbent Mack Butler of Rainbow City. Hunter argues that ads praising Trump and attacking socialism unfairly aid his Trump-aligned opponent. The Democratic National Committee filed a separate challenge in Washington; Sunday’s order came in the New York case.
The White House has defended the spots as public service announcements. Trump said October 5 that his MAGA Inc. super PAC would pay for future ads. That pledge did not resolve questions about the public money already spent.
The spending has also drawn Republican scrutiny. Alabama Sen. Katie Britt, who chairs the Senate panel overseeing Homeland Security funding, said tax dollars should be spent for their intended purposes and within the law. Senate Majority Leader John Thune also opposed taxpayer funding for the spots.
For now, the court has imposed an enforceable stop on the ads and further payments. Whether the spending was unlawful—and what further relief the plaintiffs may obtain—remains to be decided.
