The Department of Justice faces questions over the Trump administration's $20 million taxpayer-funded television ad campaign after government commercials continued airing for hours following a federal judge's order to halt further spending and cancel existing placements. In a court filing Monday, the department attributed the delay to an internal email communication problem.

U.S. District Judge Jennifer Rochon of the Manhattan federal court issued a temporary restraining order at 6:46 p.m. Sunday, Oct. 11, barring the Department of Homeland Security from spending any more of the $20 million allocated for the campaign and requiring the cancellation of existing placements, including those scheduled for that evening.

According to AdImpact data cited in a new filing by the plaintiffs, the government's ads appeared in nearly 400 television spots during programs that began at 7 p.m. Eastern time. One ad aired in 193 spots during CBS' 60 Minutes, while another aired in 198 spots during ABC's America's Funniest Home Videos.

The plaintiffs also reported that the ads continued airing Monday. As of 2:45 p.m., an ad titled "Maduro" had aired another 20 times, one titled "Final Battle" had aired 11 times and another titled "The Country He Loves" had aired once.

In a separate court filing Monday, the Justice Department acknowledged that the restraining order had not been promptly communicated to the agency officials responsible for implementing it.

According to the filing, the judge emailed the order to the parties at 6:46 p.m. Sunday, but government counsel did not forward it to agency counsel until 7:58 p.m. Agency counsel did not see the email until Monday morning. "The undersigned apologizes to the Court and the plaintiffs," DOJ wrote.

The department told Rochon that the $20 million Customs and Border Protection purchase order had been stayed, future payments were frozen, the Office of Management and Budget's funding apportionment was on hold, and the outside vendor had been instructed to stop running the commercials.

The plaintiffs said they weren't seeking contempt sanctions at this stage. Instead, they requested a status conference to determine whether the administration was complying with the court's order.

About $19 million of the $20 million allocated for the campaign had already been spent before the restraining order was issued, according to a sworn declaration by Holly Mehringer, a senior DHS official. The White House Office of Management and Budget allocated the funds from Customs and Border Protection for what it described as "OBBBA commemorative events," referring to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Trump signed into law in 2025.

The Homeland Security funding used for the ads came from a $175 million package Congress provided to the department as part of Trump's immigration enforcement agenda. The contract was awarded to Maryland-based advertising firm LMD Agency Inc.

One of the commercials was identical to an ad Trump ran during his 2024 presidential campaign, with only the funding disclaimer changed to read "Paid for by the United States Government." The campaign began in late September and included placements on Fox, CNN, MSNBC, Newsmax, CBS, ABC and ESPN.

Before Rochon issued the restraining order, the Justice Department argued in a court filing late Saturday that the effort to halt the spending should be denied because the ads "will not continue past tomorrow."

DHS also told the court that it had instructed LMD Agency not to make additional media buys after Oct. 11 and had no plans to use appropriated funds for similar contracts. The administration argued that judicial intervention was unnecessary because the campaign was already scheduled to end. Rochon rejected that argument, finding that the dispute wasn't moot and that the plaintiffs were to succeed in their legal challenge.

The ruling followed lawsuits filed by Common Cause, the Democratic National Committee, two labor unions and a Democratic state legislative candidate in Alabama. The plaintiffs alleged that the administration had improperly used public funds for partisan political advertising ahead of the November midterm elections.

The lawsuits argue that the government diverted money to produce what the plaintiffs describe as partisan political propaganda, in violation of federal restrictions on using taxpayer funds for unauthorized "publicity or propaganda." Democracy Forward, a legal advocacy group, represents the Common Cause coalition.

DNC Chair Ken Martin said in a statement that Trump was misusing taxpayer dollars in "a last-ditch attempt to save Republicans in November." Omar Noureldin, senior vice president of policy and litigation at Common Cause, said his organization did not trust that Trump would refrain from using outside money for future ads.