A federal judge issued an order Sunday night requiring President Donald Trump to halt all remaining television advertisements funded with millions of dollars in taxpayer money, despite administration statements that the broadcast campaign was already ending.

U.S. District Judge Jennifer L. Rochon ruled in New York for a coalition, including the nonpartisan watchdog group Common Cause, that challenged the broadcasts as an unlawful expenditure of public funds.

Under the temporary restraining order, the administration was directed to cancel any remaining commercials, including those scheduled to air Sunday evening.

“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.

Asked for comment, the White House referred to an Oct. 5 social media post from Trump in which he defended the taxpayer-funded ads as “rather standard” while stating, amid public backlash, that he would cover them using political fundraising.

In a court submission late Saturday, the Justice Department argued that a temporary restraining order was unnecessary because “the alleged offending conduct will end tomorrow.”

The Department of Homeland Security allocated $20 million in public funds for the commercials. Legal experts have said the expenditure violated a federal statute prohibiting congressionally appropriated funds from being used for “publicity or propaganda,” along with potential breaches of other laws.

In a court declaration submitted Saturday, senior DHS official Holly Mehringer wrote that the funds originated from congressional allocations that are “available for, among other things, ‘commemorating efforts and events related to border security.’”

Responding to the ruling, Democracy Forward, the legal non-profit representing the plaintiffs, welcomed the swift judicial action.

“We are pleased the court acted swiftly to prevent more taxpayer dollars from being used for such blatantly unlawful political propaganda,” the plaintiffs said in a statement.

“There is no legal justification — and no precedent — for the president to use the machinery of the government and funds set aside by Congress for other uses to influence electoral outcomes that further his own agenda.”

Although the White House has characterized the spots as public service announcements similar to those used by previous administrations to promote policy, the recent commercials differ from traditional public announcements because they do not aim to help citizens access specific government programs.

Instead, the commercial series, which began airing in late September, focuses heavily on Trump and reflects his political messaging ahead of the midterms.

Features include a clip of Trump discussing the threat of communism, footage recycled from his previous presidential campaign, and a fifth ad released Tuesday highlighting the Trump administration’s capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro.

The use of government funding for the campaign drew substantial criticism, including from within the Republican Party.

“It shouldn’t be paid for with taxpayer dollars,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told reporters.

Separately, the Democratic National Committee has filed its own lawsuit against the Republican administration over the commercial expenditures.

After the backlash, Trump said he would fund the commercials through a campaign account. However, a White House official confirmed there are no immediate plans to reimburse the government for the funds already spent.