Donald Trump Can’t Build White House Ballroom Without Congressional Approval, Appeals Court Rules

A federal appellate court ruled on Friday that Donald Trump must get congressional approval to build his massive new ballroom at the East Wing of the White House. In a 2-1 decision, the court ruled that construction on the ballroom will have to halt, except for those parts of the structure for safety and security. But the judges are giving Trump’s team 14 days to seek Supreme Court review. “Each President is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House and its Executive Residence,” the judges wrote. “The President has no—and claims no—constitutionally assigned authority over that property, which is designed and maintained for the use of all Presidents, current and future, and for the American people.” A lower court judge also ruled that Trump needed to go to Congress to build the ballroom, but as the president has appealed the decision, that ruling was stayed. That meant that construction could continue on the ballroom, with portions of the new structure visible in an aerial view. Watch on Deadline “Whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help,” the judges, Patricia Millett and Bradley Garcia, wrote. Judge Naomi Rao dissented, arguing that the plaintiff, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, lacked standing and that the ballroom is “likely within the President’s authority to make improvements to the Executive Residence atthe White House.” The ballroom is among Trump’s top priorities among all projects he has undertaken throughout Washington, a list that includes remaking Lafayette Park, restoring fountains and re-gilding statues and plans for a massive arch between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery. Despite overwhelming public comments opposing the massive new ballroom, Trump has won approval from key groups overseeing some of the changes to the White House, including the National Capital Planning Commission, dominated by the president’s allies. Last October, Trump ordered the tearing down of the East Wing of the White House, alarming preservation groups as there was no public review of the plans. Trump had previously indicated that the structure would not be impacted by his plans for the ballroom. The president has touted the ballroom as necessary for entertaining at the White House, long in need of larger space. State dinners are at times held in an outside tent, given the limited space in the East Room. The National Trust warned that the new structure, at about 90,000 square feet, would overwhelm the White House’s main building, or the Executive Residence, at about 55,000 square feet. Trump has said that the new structure would be constructed with private funds, including with contributions from companies including Comcast and Amazon, but The Washington Post reported in May that $352 million in Secret Service funding had been redirected to White House security. Trump has bashed the National Trust, and in recent remarks has suggested that the entire construction is essential for security, not just an underground bunker. The district could had made an exception for below-ground construction of national security facilities, as well as measures “strictly necessary” to protect the president and his staff. But the judge made clear that did not include constructing the above ground ballroom. While Trump’s team has argued that halting the project would jeopardize overall security at the White House, the appellate judges didn’t buy it. They wrote that “any risk caused by the construction project and its multi-year timetable is overwhelmingly a problem of the Defendants’ own creation. The Defendants unilaterally and likely without lawful authority destroyed a large portion of the White House structure and dug an open pit in its place. Then, after commencing a lengthy construction project, they publicly announced to the world the vulnerabilities that self-chosen endeavor has created.” They added, “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.” More to come.