A federal judge in New York has temporarily halted a $20 million government-funded advertising campaign featuring President Donald Trump ahead of the November midterm elections, finding that the plaintiffs challenging the expenditure are likely to prevail on their claims that the funding ran afoul of federal appropriations laws.
U.S. District Judge Jennifer Rochon, a Biden appointee, issued a temporary restraining order Sunday evening, directing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to stop funding the advertisements and cancel scheduled broadcasts. She followed up Monday with a 40-page opinion explaining her reasoning.
The lawsuit, brought by Common Cause, an Alabama Democratic legislative candidate, and a labor union and its political action committee, challenges the administration's use of funds appropriated for border-security purposes to pay for television advertisements highlighting Trump's accomplishments and criticizing political ideologies and opponents.
The administration opposed the request for emergency relief, arguing that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue and that the dispute was effectively moot because DHS had already decided to stop purchasing the advertisements. It did not separately contest the plaintiffs' arguments regarding the applicable spending restrictions at this preliminary stage. But Rochon rejected the jurisdictional arguments.
How the Advertising Campaign Was Funded
According to the court's opinion, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) requested an additional $20 million allocation for commemorating border-security efforts on September 19. The Office of Management and Budget approved the request approximately 95 minutes later. The following day, CBP issued a $20 million purchase order to LMD Agency for a national media campaign, with the advertisements beginning to air September 23.
The campaign included five advertisements identified in the lawsuit, including one titled "Final Battle," which closely resembled an advertisement from Trump's 2024 presidential campaign. The newer version omitted the appeal to vote for Trump and identified the U.S. government as its sponsor.
By October 8, the advertisements had aired more than 16,000 times, generating an estimated 1.56 billion impressions at an estimated cost of $15.4 million, according to figures submitted by the plaintiffs.
The funding came from a congressional appropriation covering several border-security activities, including commemorating border-security efforts and events. Rochon examined the statutory language and legislative history, concluding that Congress intended the commemorative category to cover matters such as memorials, agency anniversaries, and recognition ceremonies rather than the advertising campaign at issue.
Why the Judge Intervened
Rochon found that the plaintiffs had demonstrated a substantial likelihood of succeeding on claims involving two federal spending restrictions. The first, known as the Purpose Statute, generally requires federal agencies to spend appropriated funds for the purposes Congress authorized. The second restricts using federal appropriations for unauthorized publicity or propaganda, including materials designed to benefit a political party or candidate.
The judge also determined that the plaintiffs had standing to bring the challenge because the advertisements potentially disadvantaged candidates and political organizations competing against the messages they conveyed.
President Trump announced on October 5 that he would begin paying for the advertisements himself and using funds raised through MAGA Inc. The administration subsequently informed the court that DHS-funded media purchases would end October 11. However, Rochon found that the existing agreement, outstanding payments, and possibility of additional spending meant the administration's representations did not eliminate the need for temporary relief.
Her order stays the $20 million purchase agreement and the corresponding funding allocation, prevents further DHS expenditures on the challenged advertisements, and requires cancellation of existing placements. It also directs the advertising contractor to stop running the spots. The order remains effective for 14 days, subject to extension.
Bear in mind: The ruling is preliminary, not a final determination that the administration violated federal law. Nor does it generally prohibit Trump or political organizations from financing advertisements using private funds.
For now, the dispute turns on a narrower question: whether the funding Congress authorized for border-security-related activities could be used for this particular advertising campaign. Rochon concluded that the plaintiffs are likely to prevail on their argument that it could not.
Editor's Note: Do you enjoy RedState's conservative reporting that takes on the radical Left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the Conversation
VIP members get the ability to comment on articles.