Former President Trump and his running mate Ohio Sen. JD Vance were both feeling gracious on their last trips through the Pittsburgh area.

Trump gave $100 to a woman purchasing groceries at Sprankle’s Supermarket in Kittanning on Sept. 23. Sprankle’s also has locations in Saxonburg and Leechburg.

“It just went down 100 bucks,” Trump said as he handed $100 to a woman in the grocery line, after Sprankle’s owner mentioned that she has a big family to feed. “We’ll do that for you from the White House, all right?”

Vance paid for diners’ meals at Primanti Bros. restaurant in North Versailles on Sept. 28.

Handing money directly to potential voters might raise some eyebrows, but the acts were within campaign finance laws, according to experts who spoke to TribLive.

Gene Mazo, a Duquesne University law professor who specializes in politics, said giving money directly to potential voters can be construed as a campaign finance violation under certain circumstances.

In Trump’s and Vance’s cases, however, there was nothing improper, he said.

Mazo said the candidates didn’t say anything that indicated the gifts were explicitly in exchange for a vote, which is what would need to happen in order to be considered a violation.

“It is a federal crime to pay someone to vote in a federal election, but Trump just giving out 100 bucks to someone buying groceries, that is just a media stunt,” Mazo said. “It is like a campaign buying an ad on television.”

Trump spent about 15 minutes in Sprankle’s. He spoke with the store’s owner and other shoppers. He praised the place and lamented inflation and rising grocery prices, which he blamed on his Democratic rival, Vice President Kamala Harris.

At no point did Trump suggest his gift to the shopper was in exchange for a vote.

Vance was initially denied entry into Primanti Bros. in North Versailles last Saturday due to confusion among the restaurant’s staff, who were not notified in advance of the visit. He eventually entered briefly. When he returned outside, Vance told his supporters that he paid for people’s meals due to the confusion.

“We went in there, we paid for everybody’s food, we gave them a nice tip. And of course when I gave [the staff] a nice tip, I said ‘no taxes on tips,’” Vance said, referencing a Trump campaign plank of eliminating federal taxes on tips workers receive, according to a video posted by the Washington County Republican Facebook account.

Shohin Vance, a Philadelphia-based attorney who specializes in election and campaign law, said neither candidate’s actions constitute a campaign violation.

He said JD Vance picking up the check during a campaign stop is a normal occurrence during elections.

Giving someone $100 is more unusual, Vance said, but not against the rules.

Shohin Vance, who is not related to the senator, said neither stop displayed any quid pro quo, and he noted it actually made sense for Trump and his running mate to point out their campaign messages during the encounters.

“One of the main messages of the Trump campaign is the economy and inflation. It makes perfect sense why they would do that,” Shohin Vance said. “Whether you think it is genuine or a stunt, it is part of the campaign narrative.”

He said that adding a message to each gift — Trump saying it was to help with high grocery prices, and Vance reminding workers of the no-tax on tips pledge — made each action less murky legally.

If the candidates didn’t say anything, it could make it easier to speculate that the gifts were a quid pro quo, according to Shohin Vance.

Mazo noted the campaign stops could have shaped the minds of some voters but said “influence is not quid pro quo.”

He said the U.S. Supreme Court has a very high standard for corruption, likely higher than the layperson believes, and Trump and Vance didn’t come close to exceeding that level.

“It is not really clear that those translate directly into a vote,” Mazo said.

Copyright ©2025— Trib Total Media, LLC (TribLIVE.com)