Donald Trump has repeatedly defended Vivek Ramaswamy’s controversial campaign advertisement featuring the estranged mother of his Democratic opponent, Amy Acton. Newly released court documents corroborate key elements of Acton’s account of childhood abuse and instability, raising questions about the claims being presented to Ohio voters.
US President Donald Trump has again defended a controversial political advertisement targeting Ohio Democratic governor candidate Amy Acton, despite newly released court records corroborating significant details of her account of childhood abuse. The advertisement, produced by Republican candidate Vivek Ramaswamy’s campaign, features Acton’s estranged mother accusing her daughter of lying about her past, even though the two have not been in contact for nearly five decades.
Trump continues defending controversial advertisement
President Donald Trump has maintained his support for an attack advertisement that has divided Republicans ahead of the 3 November midterm elections.
Trump defended the advertisement again on Saturday, 24 October, while speaking to reporters after casting his early ballot in West Palm Beach, Florida, according to the Associated Press.
His latest intervention followed several days of criticism from politicians in both parties over the decision to feature Amy Acton’s estranged mother, Donna Arthur.
On Thursday, Trump praised the advertisement on social media, saying Ramaswamy should continue running it and describing the campaign’s use of Acton’s mother as “hitting pay dirt”.
At an Iowa rally, Trump revealed that he had personally encouraged Ramaswamy to continue using the advertisement.
On Friday, reporters repeatedly challenged Trump over the circumstances surrounding Acton’s estrangement from her mother.
Trump dismissed the relevance of those circumstances, saying the advertisement concerned a mother criticising her daughter rather than the allegations involving Acton’s stepfather.
According to ABC News, Trump said:
“This has nothing to do with a stepfather or anything else.”
He also defended the principle of using a family member’s criticism against a political candidate, despite being questioned about the childhood allegations.
What does the Ramaswamy advertisement claim?
The 60-second advertisement began circulating on social media on 19 October.
It features Donna Arthur, Acton’s biological mother, questioning her daughter’s credibility and disputing accounts of her childhood.
Arthur declares:
“She is a liar. She lies about her past.”
She specifically disputes Acton’s description of living in a tent during a period of family instability.
The advertisement does not explicitly mention the historical sexual abuse allegations. However, it challenges Acton’s account of her childhood without explaining the circumstances in which she and her mother became estranged.
Ramaswamy confirmed on 20 October that his campaign had produced the advertisement and announced plans to spend $4 million promoting it.
His campaign maintains that voters should be allowed to hear criticism from someone who knew Acton personally.
Ramaswamy has insisted that the advertisement is about his opponent’s honesty, rather than childhood sexual abuse.
But the public record concerning Acton’s childhood provides important context missing from the advertisement.
What happened to Amy Acton in 1978?
Acton, now 60, has publicly discussed her difficult childhood for several years, including allegations of sexual abuse by her stepfather and periods of homelessness.
In 1978, when Acton was 12 years old, her stepfather, Cledith Arthur, was arrested and charged with raping her.
According to contemporary reporting and historical court documents, he was arrested on 14 July 1978 and pleaded not guilty four days later.
A Mahoning County grand jury indicted him in September 1978.
However, the case never proceeded to trial.
Arthur failed to attend a subsequent court appearance, and an arrest warrant was issued after authorities determined that he had left his last known address without providing forwarding information.
Further warrants and attempts to locate him followed.
He was never brought to trial and died in Pennsylvania in 2004.
Because Arthur was never tried, there was no criminal conviction establishing his guilt. Equally, the absence of a conviction does not mean the allegations were disproved. The historical records establish that criminal proceedings were initiated but never completed.
Acton and her younger brother were removed from their mother’s care following the allegations.
According to Acton, she has not seen or spoken to her mother since 1978.
Donna Arthur remained married to Cledith Arthur until his death.
Newly released court documents support key details
The controversy prompted renewed examination of the original criminal proceedings.
On 22 October, Mahoning County Clerk of Courts Michael P. Ciccone released a redacted collection of historical court records following legal review.
The documents were retrieved from microfilm and provide independent confirmation of the 1978 charge, subsequent indictment and efforts to locate Cledith Arthur after he failed to appear in court.
The records are particularly important because they do not rely solely on documents supplied by Acton’s election campaign.
They also provide evidence relevant to another disputed aspect of her childhood.
Donna Arthur denies that her daughter ever lived in a tent.
However, a 1978 arrest warrant lists Terrace Lake Park, a campground, as Cledith Arthur’s address.
A later sheriff’s note records information from the campground manager indicating that Arthur had camped there.
While these documents do not independently establish every detail of Acton’s account of living in a tent, they corroborate the family’s connection to the campground.
The records have been examined by independent journalists, including Signal Ohio and FactCheck.org.
The publicly released court records are also available for independent examination.
Acton’s brother supports her account
Amy Acton’s younger brother, Philip Stearns, has publicly challenged the advertisement and corroborated his sister’s account of their childhood.
In a response video released by Acton’s campaign on 20 October, Stearns described the neglect and abuse that he says both children experienced.
He said:
“I received a lot of abuse, but Amy always got the worst of it.”
Stearns described his sister attempting to protect him during their childhood.
He has also criticised Ramaswamy for using their estranged mother in a political campaign.
His testimony represents a second family member’s account that directly challenges the allegations made by Donna Arthur in the advertisement.
It is not, by itself, a judicial finding about the historical abuse allegations, but it adds significant context to the conflicting accounts being presented publicly.
Republican politicians divided over the advertisement
The advertisement has produced unusually public disagreement among senior Republicans.
Ohio’s outgoing Republican Governor Mike DeWine, who has endorsed Ramaswamy as his preferred successor, criticised the advertisement on Thursday.
DeWine described it as “deeply, deeply troubling” and urged the campaign to remove it.
His criticism drew particular attention because Acton previously served as Ohio’s director of health during his administration.
DeWine has not withdrawn his endorsement of Ramaswamy.
Republican Senator Jon Husted and Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose also criticised the advertisement, while Iowa Republican Senate candidate Ashley Hinson called for its withdrawal.
Vice President JD Vance, however, defended Ramaswamy and criticised Republicans who objected to the advertisement.
The Ramaswamy campaign has also accused critics of applying a double standard, pointing to previous Democratic criticism involving the business activities of Ramaswamy’s mother.
DeWine has acknowledged that criticism of candidates’ family members is not confined to one party, while distinguishing it from the current multimillion-dollar advertising campaign.
The dispute has exposed differing positions within the Republican Party over the use of family members’ personal allegations during election campaigns.
Amy Acton responds to the attack
Acton has condemned the advertisement and accused Ramaswamy of exploiting her childhood experiences.
The former Ohio public health director has previously spoken about how those experiences shaped her decision to pursue a career in medicine.
Her difficult upbringing was not a story introduced for the first time during the 2026 election campaign.
In a 2019 interview with the Youngstown newspaper The Vindicator, she discussed moving frequently, experiencing abuse and living in unstable accommodation.
That earlier account predates the current campaign by several years.
Acton has described the advertisement as an exploitative use of a painful family history.
Her campaign has responded by publicising the historical court records and releasing her brother’s account.
A question of political advertising and evidence
The dispute raises two separate questions.
The first concerns the accuracy of the statements in the advertisement.
The historical records establish that Acton’s stepfather faced criminal charges, was indicted and failed to appear in court. They also substantiate important aspects of the family’s history.
They do not establish every allegation beyond doubt, nor do they resolve every disagreement between Acton and her mother.
Nevertheless, the documentary evidence directly challenges the impression that Acton’s childhood account can simply be dismissed as an invention.
The second question concerns the decision to use testimony from an estranged family member without explaining why the relationship ended.
Trump and Ramaswamy argue that criticism from a candidate’s mother is relevant to voters evaluating that candidate’s honesty.
Critics, including members of their own party, argue that the advertisement omits essential context surrounding the separation and the criminal allegations.
Trump’s repeated defence of the advertisement does not establish that he supports Cledith Arthur or condones the alleged abuse. What is documented is that he has continued endorsing its use after journalists raised the historical evidence and questioned the credibility of the mother’s account.
With Ohio voters due to choose their next governor on 3 November, the controversy has become a debate not only about the two candidates, but also about the reliability of political advertising and the responsibility to provide relevant context when making allegations about a person’s past.
Sources and further reading
- Associated Press: Trump’s remarks after voting in Florida on 24 October
- ABC News: Trump’s defence of the advert
- Signal Ohio: Acton family history and court records
- FactCheck.org: historical records and contested claims
- Released Mahoning County court documents
- Earlier Fish 4 News coverage of the Ohio advertisement controversy
