Share and Follow
A federal judge recently exhibited renewed skepticism towards President Trump’s proposed ballroom construction project at the White House, as he considered a fresh attempt by preservationists to block the initiative.
On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon challenged the Justice Department’s various justifications for allowing the $400 million project to move forward without needing congressional approval. Judge Leon, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush, remarked, “This has been a case where there have been shifting theories, shifting dynamics, I regret to say, from the beginning.”
The construction plan, which involves demolishing part of the East Wing to make way for a new 90,000-square-foot ballroom, began in October. The ballroom is intended to host state dinners, galas, and other significant events, with completion anticipated by 2028 and mainly funded by private donations.
Last month, a panel from the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, whose commissioners were appointed by Trump earlier this year, gave their approval for the project.
The ballroom is slated for completion by 2028 and is being funded mostly by private donors. A panel of the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, whose commissioners were appointed by Trump in January, approved the proposal last month.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation sued the Trump administration in December to stop the project until the White House abides by federal law and other rules, such as obtaining congressional approval and going through multiple independent reviews and a public comment period.
Lawyers for the preservationists said Tuesday that the government has put the court on a “monthslong merry-go-round ride” regarding who is in charge of the project, complicating legal review, but now claims that the project is too far along to stop.
“What they can’t do here is have it both ways,” said lawyer Thaddeus Heuer.
But DOJ lawyer Yaakov Roth said the ballroom construction project has always had a “dual source of funding and dual source of authority.”
Leon called it a “brazen interpretation of the law’s vocabulary.”
The judge noted several times that the White House isn’t just any national park. He called it an “iconic symbol of this nation” and described Trump as a “steward” of the building as president, not its owner.
The East Wing demolition was met with swift backlash from preservationists, historians and Democratic lawmakers, who slammed the White House for bypassing the traditional process.
“There is no track record of this ever being done,” Leon said.
The judge previously declined to halt the construction of the ballroom. He ruled last month that the preservationists did not properly challenge the renovations, offering the organization a chance to amend its complaint, which he could reconsider.
“To be fair, the President’s source of legal authority to construct the ballroom was not apparent before the National Trust brought its motion,” the judge wrote in his Feb. 26 ruling. “And to make things murkier, Defendants initially suggested that there was a dispute about the President’s constitutional authority.
“But Defendants’ subsequent abandonment of any constitutional claims of authority places this case — as it now stands — squarely in” the territory of Supreme Court precedent regarding when courts can second-guess the president, he added.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation filed a new complaint and asked Leon to block the project again, which is the matter now before him.
Roth said Tuesday that, even if the judge sides with the preservationists, he should not order construction halted, citing national security and “practical reasons.”
Leon said he would aim to rule by the end of the month.