Trump ordered to halt taxpayer-funded ads: What is the legal dispute about?

In a setback for the Trump administration, US District Judge Jennifer L Rochon in New York issued a temporary restraining order directing to immediately halt and cancel any remaining television commercials paid for with millions of dollars in taxpayer money. The decision was announced by the federal judge ordered Sunday night, even as the administration said the ad campaign was coming to an end. The order was in favour of a coalition, including the nonpartisan watchdog Common Cause, that challenged the ads as an illegal misuse of funds. She told the administration to cancel any remaining ads, including any set to air Sunday night.

Also Read: 'I ended 8 wars': Trump slams Nobel Peace prize decision, claims award was his due

“Defendants shall not enter into, renew, or expand any agreement authorizing the development, creation, dissemination, placement, or airing of the challenged advertisements” during the two-week duration of her order, the judge said.

Also Read: Trump claims ‘energy ceasefire’ between Russia and Ukraine

Responding on the development, the White House referred to an Oct. 5 social media post from Trump in which he defended the taxpayer-funded ads as "rather standard." But he also said that he would pay for them from his political fundraising. In a court filing late Saturday, the Justice Department argued that the temporary restraining order was unnecessary because “the alleged offending conduct will end on Sunday.”

Why is Trump's $20 million ad campaign facing legal scrutiny?

The White House has defended the ads as public service announcements akin to what past administrations have done to promote various policies. The ads began airing in late September, glorify Trump and echo his political messaging going into the midterms. One features a clip of Trump talking about the threat of communism and another is from his last presidential campaign. The fifth ad in the campaign began airing Tuesday, focusing on the Trump administration’s capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro. The Department of Homeland Security allegedly tapped $20 million in taxpayer money for the ads. However, in a court declaration Saturday, senior DHS official Holly Mehringer wrote that the money came from funds appropriated by Congress that are “available for, among other things, ‘commemorating efforts and events related to border security.’”

According to legal experts who spoke to news agency AP Said that it violated a federal statute against congressionally appropriated money being used for “publicity or propaganda” and potentially other laws. Amid the backlash, Trump said he would start paying for the ads with a campaign account. A White House official said there were no immediate plans to reimburse the government for money already spent.