...
By Marni Rose McFall
Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
A lawsuit seeking to block President Donald Trump’s face from appearing on a 24-karat gold commemorative coin has been delayed due to paperwork ... again.
The lawsuit, filed in March by Portland resident James Rickher, alleged that having the president's face on a coin violates 31 U.S.C. § 5114, which bans currency from depicting a U.S. president.
The most recent delay came on April 28, when Judge Karin J. Immergut, a Trump-appointed judge from his first term in office who had previously blocked the president's deployment of the National Guard to Portland, said that the docket had not been properly served on the U.S. attorney.
Read More on News
In an email to Newsweek, Rickher said: "I filed this lawsuit because it needed to be done. The legal analysis underpinning the administration's effort to produce this coin is consistent with what we've seen before: intellectually lazy and, at times, disingenuous. I'm under no illusion that this is the most pressing issue facing the country or the world. But this administration's disregard for norms, rules, regulations, and laws is so pervasive that even smaller matters like this slip through."
Why It Matters
The Trump administration has embarked upon a broad push to add the president's name to cultural landmarks and prominent federal institutions as a part of the upcoming 250th anniversary of U.S. independence.
...
This includes adding his signature on U.S. currency, efforts to rename the John F. Kennedy Center of the Performing Arts, and a new "Trump" class of warship.
In a new and unprecedented move, it has also been announced that the U.S. State Department is finalizing plans to include the president's portrait on new passports, marking the first time a sitting president has been featured on official travel documents. The new design will feature the president on the inside cover to commemorate the 250th anniversary of U.S. independence, the State Department previously told Newsweek.
What To Know
Rickher is a novice coin collector and a former lawyer. His original lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court in Portland, against Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Megan Sullivan, the acting chief of design management at the U.S. Mint.
Bessent had presented options for a coin design to the president, who then selected the final design. On March 20, the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts approved the final design of the coin, which features an official White House photograph. That approval paved the way for the U.S. Mint to begin production on the coin.
Rickher's lawsuit seeks to prevent the coin's production and argues that it cannot be meaningfully recalled once issued.
But if halting production isn't possible? "I would hope this lawsuit brings attention to the broader pattern of abuse and the waste of taxpayer dollars in service of one individual's ego. As a novice numismatist, and as a former federal agent and attorney, I view the production of this coin as a clear violation of the law," Rickher said.
It also seeks to restrain any production, distribution, issuing or selling of a coin that bears the likeness of any living individual, including Trump.
Previous Delays
It's not the first time this lawsuit has been delayed.
An order dated April 10 stated that the judge could not proceed with the case because the plaintiff had not properly served the summons, saying, "Plaintiff must immediately serve all parties in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("FRCP"). Plaintiff is responsible for serving the summons, his amended complaint, his amended preliminary injunction motion, and this Order on all parties. Plaintiff's Proof of Service, ECF [10], does not demonstrate service on the United States in accordance with FRCP."
Five days later, the plaintiff told the court the summons had been filed.
However, the newest order from Judge Immergut on April 28 reads in part, “Review of the docket does not show service on the U.S. attorney in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(i)(1)(A). Plaintiff is ORDERED to serve the U.S. attorney consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure.”
Addressing this most recent delay, Rickher said: "That's simply life. I have a job, I'm starting a business, I volunteer, I have a girlfriend and a dog, and I am trying to tackle some large house projects. That said, the delay has now been resolved. The next step is to confer with the assistant U.S. attorney assigned to the case and propose a briefing schedule, as ordered by the court. That will happen within the next seven days, and I don't anticipate any issues reaching agreement and moving the case forward."
What Happens Next
The lawsuit now needs to be served to the U.S. attorney within seven days of the judge's order on May 5.
Update 4/30/26, 4:42 a.m. ET: This article has been updated to include comment from James Rickher.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines