San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu is asking a California court to stop Truth API, Trump Media’s paid post feed, alleging that it sells an improper advantage in receiving government information. The civil lawsuit establishes neither illegal subscriber trading nor a ban on the service.

Trump Media disputes the central premise. In a statement reported by Bloomberg Law on September 22, the company said the lawsuit misunderstands the distinction between public and nonpublic information and accused the attorneys bringing it of political partisanship. Whether the information being sold is legally nonpublic is a contested issue, rather than a finding accompanying the complaint.

The action was filed September 21 in San Francisco Superior Court and announced at Chiu’s September 22 press conference, Courthouse News Service reported. The plaintiff is the People of California, acting through the city attorney. Trump Media and unidentified defendants are named; President Donald Trump personally is not a named defendant.

What Truth API sells

Trump Media announced the service on July 16, describing a licensed, machine-readable feed for organizations that need fast access to influential Truth Social accounts. The company identified high-frequency and algorithmic trading firms as customers for whom delays matter. It presented automated delivery as an alternative to monitoring the platform manually.

The release said Truth API would deliver posts in milliseconds and was expected to offer continuous coverage and an archive reaching back to 2022. It anticipated availability beginning August 1. Those were the company’s launch expectations, not a fresh September announcement or an independent test of delivery speeds.

Interim Chief Executive Officer Kevin McGurn described Truth API as a way to generate recurring revenue from the company’s own assets and create value for shareholders. The release acknowledged that customer adoption, availability and revenue expectations were forward-looking statements subject to uncertainty. It did not claim a guaranteed investment return for subscribers.

According to Courthouse News Service’s report, baseline access costs $100,000 monthly, with a $60,000 monthly rate offered for a three-year commitment. Chiu argues that an expensive head start disadvantages ordinary investors, including people whose savings are invested through pensions, retirement accounts and education plans. Those asserted harms form part of his case; they are not a court’s calculation of losses.

The 22-page complaint brings one civil claim under California’s Unfair Competition Law. It argues that operating the feed is both unlawful and unfair. Its references to federal securities and ethics laws explain the legal theories behind that state-law claim; this pleading does not bring criminal charges.

One theory invokes the STOCK Act’s restriction on executive branch officials using nonpublic information obtained through government work for private profit. Another alleges that Trump Media facilitates violations of securities laws involving material nonpublic information. The complaint also argues that the practice harms investors enough to constitute unfair competition, apart from its claims of unlawful conduct.

The ownership connection is central to the plaintiff’s argument. As Bloomberg reported, the complaint says Trump holds a 41% stake through a revocable trust of which he is the sole beneficiary. The lawsuit contends that money earned by Truth API therefore benefits him as well as the company. That is an alleged financial incentive, not proof of illegal trading.

What the court is being asked to do

The requested relief includes an injunction against offering Truth API or similar services that violate the state law, plus civil penalties of up to $2,500 per violation. That is a requested ceiling, not a fine already imposed. The complaint also seeks litigation costs and applicable interest. The court has been asked to decide liability and relief; the filing itself supplies neither.

Read our editorial standards on distinguishing allegations from established facts.