Judge Halts Donald Trump’s Taxpayer-Funded TV Ads, Constitutional Scholar Calls Them 'Propaganda' With No Public Benefit: 'So Poorly Done'

President Donald Trump’s taxpayer-funded television campaign has received an abrupt cancellation notice, and a constitutional scholar says Americans should never have been forced to finance it.

U.S. District Judge Jennifer L. Rochon ordered the administration Sunday night to cancel any remaining commercials paid for with public money. Her temporary restraining order will remain in effect for two weeks.

Rochon sided with a coalition that includes the nonpartisan watchdog Common Cause, which alleged that the ads represent an illegal misuse of congressionally appropriated funds.

The Department of Homeland Security tapped $20 million for the campaign. Senior DHS official Holly Mehringer said the money came from funding available for “commemorating efforts and events related to border security.”

The commercials began airing in late September and celebrated Trump while echoing his political rhetoric. One featured him discussing communism, another replayed an advertisement from his 2024 presidential campaign, and a fifth promoted his administration’s capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro.

The White House characterized the campaign as public service announcements. Trump defended the commercials as “rather standard” before saying future ads would be financed through money raised by his political operation.

“We do not pay taxes to subject ourselves to propaganda,” said constitutional scholar, criminal defense attorney and author Robert J. McWhirter.

McWhirter distinguished the Trump commercials from government-funded public service announcements such as those “when a hurricane, forest fire, or earthquake hits” or when lawmakers send communications to constituents.

“These are justified as communication for the public good. The only good the ad here provided was to Donald Trump,” he said. “As usual Trump is happy to use other people’s money for himself.”

“The First Amendment to the Constitution says government can make ‘no law abridging freedom of speech,’” McWhirter said. “This protects an individual’s right to free speech, not the government’s.”

“Using our own money to support a candidate has no First Amendment protection,” he continued. “Propaganda may count as speech, but only when it is free — not something we pay for with our taxes.”

The Justice Department argued that an emergency order was unnecessary because the ad campaign was ending. Rochon imposed the restrictions anyway.

“These ads were so poorly done they looked like a caricature,” McWhirter noted. “The First Amendment protects free speech, not the propaganda Trump forces on us with our own money.”