US Politics
Federal judge appears skeptical on Trump’s authority to rebuild White House ballroom
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.
Read more
A U.S. judge has cast significant doubt on the legality of President Donald Trump’s administration’s plans to construct a $400m ballroom at the White House, questioning whether it had the authority to proceed without congressional approval. The proposed 90,000-square-foot facility is slated for the site of the recently demolished East Wing.
During a hearing concerning a lawsuit brought by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon expressed strong reservations.
He questioned whether President Trump possessed the statutory power to dismantle the East Wing and build a ballroom in its place without explicit oversight or authorization from the US Congress.
Judge Leon sharply rebuked a lawyer for the administration, stating, “Come on, be serious,” after comparisons were drawn to minor renovations, such as the installation of a swimming pool during the Gerald Ford administration in the 1970s.
The judge indicated he would issue a ruling in the coming weeks on the National Trust’s request for a preliminary injunction, which aims to halt construction work.
The National Trust initiated legal action against Trump and several federal agencies in December, arguing that the project has advanced without the necessary approvals, environmental review, or congressional authorization. The group contends that federal law prohibits construction on federal parkland in Washington without express congressional authority.
It further argues that the National Park Service violated federal law by issuing an environmental assessment instead of a full impact statement, and by releasing it only after the 120-year-old East Wing had already been demolished.
While Judge Leon declined to issue a temporary restraining order in December, the White House and other federal defendants are urging the court to deny a preliminary injunction, which would force an end to construction while the lawsuit continues.
The administration has defended the project’s legality, asserting it follows a long tradition of presidential renovations, including Franklin D. Roosevelt’s original construction of the East Wing. In a court filing, the administration stated the ballroom is essential for state functions, its design is still evolving, and above-ground construction is not planned until April, rendering an injunction unnecessary. Justice Department lawyer Jacob Roth affirmed at Thursday’s hearing that the ballroom plans serve the public interest.
Earlier this month, the National Capital Planning Commission held its first public hearing on the ballroom plans, following the White House’s submission of an application to both the NCPC and the Commission of Fine Arts last month.
