What they say: Trump said in a Truth Social article that he viewed the ads “as a positive promotion for our great United States” and defended the use of taxpayer dollars for them.
- “This is a pretty common thing, but rather than do that, even though nothing will make them happy, I decided to do patriotic ads, among other things, and pay for them myself,” Trump wrote.
- Trump said money from MAGA Inc., his superPAC, would also fund the ads.
- A person familiar with the ad plans said the taxpayer-funded ad buy would end this week, after which outside groups would begin paying for the spots.
The White House defended the ads as public service announcements, arguing that previous Republican and Democratic administrations had used taxpayer-funded advertising to promote government policies.
- The White House said the ads were not political because Trump was not on the ballot and the spots contained no calls to action.
The other side: “These advertisements constitute a flagrant violation of Congress’s prohibition on using appropriated funds for ‘advertising or propaganda purposes,’” the DNC’s legal counsel wrote in the lawsuit.
- “The president nationalized the midterm elections, placed himself at the center of a two-day ‘midterm convention,’ and repeatedly asked voters to ‘pretend I’m on the ballot,'” he adds.
- “As the 2026 midterm elections approach, Republican poll numbers have fallen in both traditional battlegrounds and generally favorable states, and Democrats are poised to take control of Congress, governors’ mansions and state legislatures across the country.”
Zoom: The lawsuit alleges that the White House designed these ads to boost the president’s approval ratings and help Republican candidates.
- The complaint focuses largely on the allegation that the ads were paid for with money that was originally allocated to Customs and Border Protection and was redirected to the television spots.
- The DNC argues that the ads violate the Administrative Procedure Act, the Anti-Deficiency Act and the Purpose Act.
The DNC asked a federal judge to intervene, declare the administration’s actions illegal and immediately stop it from running any more ads paid for with taxpayer dollars.
- It’s unclear how the judge will rule, given that President Trump said Monday that a Trump-affiliated super PAC would start paying for ads starting immediately.
- A White House spokesperson confirmed to Axios on Tuesday that the administration would not reimburse the government for the ads.
Catch up quickly: According to the lawsuit, Trump personally selected the television ads, which were shown to millions of Americans, including during NFL and college football games.
- The lawsuit says the ads aired “nearly 90 times on national television networks, including Fox, Newsmax, MS Now and CBS” over four days in late September. These spots probably cost around $337,000.
- During the same period, the ads aired on local television stations at least 2,311 times and those placements cost approximately $1.4 million, according to the suit.
- Ad tracking company AdImpact estimates that more than $2.5 million was spent on ads in the first week they aired.
Please note: Using public funds for campaign ads did not sit well with American voters.
- Nearly nine in 10 voters said in a Reuters-Ipsos poll released Wednesday that it was inappropriate to use taxpayer money on campaign ads featuring a president or government official.
Go further: Scoop: Trump’s hand-picked, taxpayer-funded ads are about to multiply
Editor’s note: This story has been updated with additional information.
Gn usa
