Judge Orders Three Taxpayer-Funded Administration Ads Pulled Days Before the Midterms, Including the '$5,000 to Americans' Spot

A federal judge in New York on Friday ordered the government to pull three taxpayer-funded Trump administration ads that appear to have been made for political or propaganda purposes, including one promoting the president's claim that every American will get $5,000 if Republicans keep control of Congress, the Associated Press reported.

U.S. District Judge Jennifer L. Rochon sided with a coalition that includes the nonpartisan watchdog Common Cause in ordering the removal of ads titled "$5,000 to Americans," "Every Democrat Voted Against No Tax on Tips," and "Cost of Socialism," according to the AP. She declined to pull several other ads. The plaintiffs had sought the removal of at least 13.

Rochon ordered the three ads taken off official government websites and social media accounts, including YouTube and Instagram. She also ordered the cancellation of any plans to air or distribute the ads through authorized third parties, including President Donald Trump's main super PAC, MAGA Inc., the AP reported.

The ruling came at a hearing on whether to expand a temporary restraining order Rochon issued two weeks earlier, when she banned a series of ads that glorify Trump and echo his campaign messaging heading into the midterms. Election Day is Tuesday.

The judge made a point of the timing. She noted that she was ruling on a Friday afternoon and that the government would have no excuse not to take the ads down immediately, according to the AP. A government lawyer said he could notify the people responsible right away. "Everyone is here. Everyone can hear my order. No one is at the theater," Rochon said, a reference to excuses government lawyers gave when her earlier order, issued over a weekend, was not immediately followed.

"This court can neither postpone an election nor turn back the clock," Rochon said, after finding that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their claims about the three ads and would suffer harm if they stayed up. She said she could reverse herself and restore the ads, or ban more of them, after hearing more evidence in the coming weeks.

Rochon did not give the plaintiffs everything they wanted. She said they were seeking to restrict the president's office in ways that were "broad and far reaching," and that she found herself concluding the government will ultimately prevail on many of the ads, the AP reported. She noted that the Government Accountability Office has said there are times when the president's office is entitled to inform the public about its policies, justify them and respond to attacks on them.

The White House responded sharply. "This Biden-appointed activist judge issued a lawless order to stop the administration from sharing patriotic videos," spokesperson Lauren Bis said. The administration has defended the ads as public service announcements similar to those past administrations made to promote policies.

The plaintiffs argue the ads differ from typical public service announcements because they do not try to help the public use specific government programs. In court papers, their lawyers wrote that Congress did not give the president's office money "to run a PR shop to help the President's allies and attack his perceived ideological opponents," according to the AP.

"This temporary restraining order will stop the administration's wanton disregard for the law while the court hears the full case," said Bradley Girard, a lawyer with Democracy Forward, which represents the coalition. "Congress has made clear that partisan ads cannot be funded with taxpayer dollars."

Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Oestericher wrote in response that there was nothing wrong with White House staff putting together ads to "inform the public about his policies and to rebut attacks on those policies and his Administration."

Rochon was nominated by former President Joe Biden and once served as a law clerk for Trump's late sister, Maryanne Trump Barry, a longtime federal appeals judge, the AP noted.

The order is temporary. The case will continue after the election, and the judge left open the possibility of changing which ads are allowed. It was not clear Friday whether the government would appeal.

Still unknown: how much public money was spent producing and placing the three ads, and whether the government will seek an emergency stay from the appeals court before Tuesday.