A federal judge in Manhattan delivered a swift ruling on Sunday, ordering the Trump administration to cease broadcasting any advertisements that present the president in a favorable light and are financed with federal funds. The injunction takes effect immediately, halting spots that were already slated for Sunday night airings.
The lawsuit was filed by the watchdog organization Common Cause Democratic Alabama House candidate Robert Hunter and a New York-based labor union with its political action committee. They joined a broader coalition that includes the Democratic National Committee all seeking to block what they describe as partisan propaganda funded by the public.
Details of the court order
U.S. District Judge Jennifer Rochon of the Southern District of New York explained that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits, would suffer irreparable harm without an injunction, and that the public interest favors stopping the ads. In her written decision, she rejected the administration’s argument that the case was moot after it claimed the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had instructed its vendor to stop buying new spots after Sunday.
Rochon expressly ordered the government to “cancel or cause to be cancelled” any remaining commercials, including those already queued for broadcast on Sunday night. She also barred the use of DHS-appropriated funds for any step involved in creating, placing, or airing the contested advertisements.
Political and legal fallout
The White House, DHS, and the Office of Management and Budget – all named as defendants – have not responded to requests for comment. MAGA Inc. the super-PAC Trump announced would take over ad payments, also declined to comment.
In a statement, the plaintiffs lauded the rapid decision, emphasizing that “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 Common Cause president, Virginia Kase Solomón added, “Our fight continues. We won’t stop until this administration is held fully accountable, and no president from any party can waste and abuse taxpayer funds for propaganda ever again.”
The controversy resurfaced after a New York Times report on Tuesday described a newly aired ad that boasted about a military operation in Venezuela, and The New Republic highlighted a repackaged 2024 campaign spot that aired on Fox News with a “Paid for by the U.S. Government” disclaimer. Although Trump announced on Monday that his super-PAC would fund future spots, evidence showed that government-backed ads continued to run days later.
On Wednesday, the Democratic National Committee filed its own 31-page complaint in federal court in Washington, arguing that the administration persisted in using public funds less than 30 days before the midterm elections. DNC Chair Ken Martin posted on social media, “Donald Trump doesn’t get to turn the federal government into his personal campaign operation, and he sure as hell doesn’t get to make taxpayers foot the bill. Using public dollars for partisan propaganda isn’t governing. It’s an abuse of power.”
Both lawsuits seek a permanent injunction to prevent further use of taxpayer money for partisan messaging, a practice that federal law expressly forbids. The Government Accountability Office has clarified that the prohibition covers communications that are “purely partisan” or designed to aid a political party or candidate.
While the administration has framed the spots as “public service announcements,” critics argue that such a label is disingenuous when the content explicitly praises the president and his policies. The legal battle is set to continue as both courts consider the merits of the claims and the broader implications for the separation of government resources from campaign activities.
