A high-stakes fight over the future of the White House took a sharp turn when a US federal appeals court ordered Donald Trump’s administration to halt construction of a $400 million ballroom planned for the site of the demolished East Wing, handing the Republican leader a major setback in a case that tests the limits of presidential power.
“Each President is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House,” the Washington-based US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said in a 2-1 opinion, concluding that a president cannot fundamentally reshape the building without congressional approval.
The panel upheld a preliminary injunction secured by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which sued last year after the administration tore down the East Wing and began building an 8,360-square-metre ballroom without first obtaining authorization from Congress.
“Whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help,” the majority wrote.
The appeals court paused its decision for 14 days, giving the Trump administration time to seek emergency relief from the US Supreme Court.
Mr Trump, who has increasingly argued the ballroom is necessary for security, described the project as a “military center” in a Truth Social post and said the administration would take the matter to the Supreme Court.
He denounced the ruling as “horrendous” and politically driven, saying it left him, White House officials and visitors more vulnerable to attack.
“This unjust decision must be overturned by the Supreme Court in its entirety,” Mr Trump wrote.
He said the plan includes bomb shelters, medical facilities, protection against drones and missiles and other security measures that are “all tied together as one big, expensive, and very complex unit.”
National Trust President Brent Leggs welcomed the ruling, calling it “a great day for our country and for the American people’s right to voice their opinions about the historic places they cherish, including the White House.”
Mr Trump pursued the appeal after US District Judge Richard Leon — an appointee of Republican former President George W. Bush — twice halted above-ground construction while permitting underground work to continue.
The administration has framed the ballroom plan as essential both for hosting large formal events and for maintaining White House security, describing it as the most ambitious of several Trump-driven efforts to remake central Washington’s landscape of government buildings and national monuments.
In a separate lawsuit, a judge recently found Mr Trump’s name had been added illegally to the exterior of the Kennedy Center performing arts venue and ordered it removed.
Appeal to national security
During arguments before the DC Circuit on 5 June, Justice Department attorney Yaakov Roth said courts had no role in assessing the privately funded project.
He argued the National Trust’s “architectural preference” should not outweigh national security, citing evidence, he said, that the former East Wing left the president and others in the White House exposed to attack.
The majority — Democratic-appointed Circuit Judges Patricia Millett and Brad Garcia — said their order does not permanently prohibit construction of a ballroom, but stops above-ground work while the lawsuit proceeds and until the White House obtains congressional approval.
National security arguments “are not an automatic get-out-of-law-free card,” the court wrote.
“The bold assertion that the Executive can act with utter lawlessness, destroying treasured national landmarks and harming the interests of individuals, and that no court can stop it flouts our constitutional order,” the judges said.
In dissent, Circuit Judge Neomi Rao, appointed by Mr Trump during his first term, said the trial judge’s injunction blocking the project “is beyond the proper province of the federal courts” and that construction should move forward.
“The district court seized supervision of construction at the White House, and my colleagues affirm this judicial overreach,” Rao wrote.
Mr Trump has also sought to justify the ballroom’s ballooning price, which has doubled from early projections.
In a Truth Social post in May, he said the cost increased because “it is approximately twice the size, and a far higher quality, than the original proposal” and promised “it will be magnificent, safe, and secure!”
