美国联邦地区法官詹妮弗·L·罗洪周五裁定，题为“给美国人的5000美元”、“每一位民主党人都投票反对小费免税”以及“社会主义的代价”这三则广告必须从政府网站和社交媒体上撤下，同时针对这些广告的诉讼继续进行。这位联邦法官裁定，这些广告很可能服务于政治或宣传目的，而非合法的公共信息宣传活动。
US District Judge Jennifer L. Rochon ruled on Friday that s titled "$5,000 to Americans,” “Every Democrat Voted Against No Tax on Tips,” and “Cost of Socialism” must be taken down from government websites and social media while a lawsuit challenging the ads proceeds. The federal judge ruled that they likely served political or propaganda purposes rather than legitimate public information campaigns.
该裁决是在包括非党派监督组织“共同事业”在内的一个联盟提起法律挑战后作出的。法官还下令政府停止通过第三方（包括特朗普总统的旗舰超级政治行动委员会“让美国再次伟大公司”）对这三则广告进行任何计划中的分发。这些广告必须从官方政府平台（包括YouTube、Instagram和其他社交媒体账号）上移除。
The ruling followed a legal challenge brought by a coalition that includes the nonpartisan watchdog Common Cause. The judge also ordered the government to halt any planned distribution of the three s through third parties, including MAGA Inc., President Donald Trump’s flagship super PAC. The s must be removed from official government platforms, including YouTube, Instagram and other social media accounts.
该命令在美国中期选举前几天发布，在此期间，特朗普反复推动一项提议，即如果共和党保持对国会的控制权，将向美国成年人提供5000美元的付款。
The order comes days before the US midterm elections, during which Trump has repeatedly promoted a proposal to provide $5,000 payments to American adults if Republicans retain control of Congress.
佐治亚州共和党候选人凯文·马丁在中期选举前支持特朗普的伊朗战略：“我们不搞滞后行动”法院将命令范围缩小至三则广告罗洪拒绝下令撤下原告质疑的其他几则政府广告。该联盟曾请求法院封锁至少13则广告。他们辩称，这些广告不当地使用纳税人资金在选举前推广特朗普的政治信息。
Georgia GOP candidate Kevin Martin backs Trump's Iran strategy ahead of midterms: 'We don't do it lagging'Court narrows order to three sRochon declined to remove several other government s challenged by the plaintiffs. The coalition had asked the court to block at least 13 ads. They argued that these ads improperly used taxpayer funds to promote Trump’s political message ahead of the election.
在裁决中，罗洪表示，政府问责局已认可白宫可以合法地解释、捍卫政府政策并回应批评。她得出结论，许多受质疑的广告最终可能经得起法律审查。然而，她认定原告很有可能在针对这三则特定广告的挑战中胜诉。
In her ruling, Rochon said the Government Accountability Office has recognised that the White House may legitimately explain, defend and respond to criticism of administration policies. She concluded that many of the challenged s could ultimately survive legal scrutiny.
罗尚还表示，如果这些广告在案件审理期间继续留在网上，该联盟可能遭受无法弥补的损害。“本法院既不能推迟选举，也不能倒转时钟，”罗尚在听证会上说道。法官强调，政府官员应立即撤下这些广告。提到早先法院命令下达后的拖延，她说道：“所有人都在场。所有人都能听到我的命令。没人是在看戏。”共和党成了自己的最大敌人白宫为广告辩护白宫发言人劳伦·比斯批评了该裁决，并称罗尚的命令违法。
However, she found that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed in challenging the three specific s. Rochon also said the coalition could suffer irreparable harm if those ads remained online while the case continued.“This court can neither postpone an election nor turn back the clock,” Rochon said during the hearing. The judge emphasized that government officials should remove the s immediately. Referring to delays after an earlier court order, she remarked, “Everyone is here. Everyone can hear my order. No one is at the theater.”Republicans have been their own worst enemiesWhite House defends sWhite House spokesperson Lauren Bis criticized the decision and called Rochon’s order unlawful.
“这位拜登任命的行动主义法官发布了非法命令，阻止政府分享爱国视频，”比斯在裁决后表示。
“This Biden-appointed activist judge issued a lawless order to stop the administration from sharing patriotic videos,” Bis said after the ruling.
裁决后，政府律师请求法院豁免“让美国再次伟大公司”（MAGA Inc.），使其不受该命令约束。他们辩称，该超级政治行动委员会不是本案当事方，且独立于联邦政府运作。截至周五晚间，法官尚未就该请求作出裁决。
Following the ruling, government lawyers asked the court to exempt MAGA Inc. from the order. They argued that the super PAC is not a party to the lawsuit and operates independently of the federal government. The judge had not ruled on that request as of Friday evening.
该案由“捍卫民主”组织代表的一个联盟提起，该联盟主张联邦法律禁止用纳税人的钱资助党派政治广告。“这项临时限制令将在法院审理完整案件期间，制止政府对法律的肆意漠视，”律师布拉德利·吉拉德在裁决后表示。
The case was filed by a coalition represented by Democracy Forward, which argued that federal law prohibits taxpayer money from financing partisan political s. “This temporary restraining order will stop the administration’s wanton disregard for the law while the court hears the full case,” attorney Bradley Girard said after the ruling.
白宫为这些广告进行了辩护，辩称它们是公共服务公告，类似于历届政府为支持不同项目而制作的公告。
The White House has defended the s, arguing that they are public service announcements similar to those produced by previous administrations to support different programs.
然而，原告主张，最新的这些广告与许多以往的公共服务公告不同，因为它们并未试图帮助公众从某些政府项目中受益。
However, the plaintiffs claim that the latest s are different from many previous PSAs in that they do not attempt to assist the public in benefiting from certain government programs.