A federal judge questioned the Trump administration’s legal justification for demolishing the White House’s East Wing and replacing it with a $400 million ballroom, pushing back Thursday when a government lawyer compared the project to past renovations, such as adding a swimming pool during the Gerald Ford administration.
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, a George W. Bush appointee, heard arguments in a lawsuit filed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which is seeking a preliminary injunction to halt work on the ballroom project. The group contends the administration lacks authority to proceed without explicit congressional approval and that the required federal review was inadequate.
During the hearing, Leon pressed Justice Department lawyers to identify a clear source of authority allowing the president to raze the East Wing and build a new structure on federal grounds in the District of Columbia. The judge focused on legal provisions that, as described in court, restrict construction on federal public grounds absent express approval from Congress, and he questioned whether routine White House maintenance funding could cover a project of this size.
Leon clapped back when the administration sought to analogize the plan to smaller historical changes to the White House complex, including the Ford-era pool. “Come on, be serious,” he said, according to Reuters.
The National Trust argues the administration began demolition before completing a full environmental review and before the public had a meaningful opportunity to weigh in, and that the project would permanently alter a historic portion of the White House complex. Reuters reported the East Wing was described in filings as about 120 years old.
The administration maintains the project is lawful and can proceed under executive branch authorities and long-standing practices for White House alterations. Reuters reported government lawyers argued that major above-ground construction is not scheduled to begin until April, and that prior presidents have made changes to the White House and its grounds without separate congressional authorization for each project.
The White House has said the ballroom would be paid for with private donations rather than taxpayer funds. Leon questioned whether routing private money through the government to build a major new structure amounts to bypassing Congress’ role in approving major projects at a nationally significant site.
The case has unfolded alongside other reviews of the ballroom proposal. The Associated Press reported that the Commission of Fine Arts, which advises on design in Washington’s monumental core, has been evaluating the ballroom’s scale and appearance and requested 3D models to better understand how it would fit with surrounding federal architecture. AP reported the plan calls for demolishing the East Wing and adding nearly 90,000 square feet, including a 22,000-square-foot ballroom, with some public comments criticizing both design and process.
Leon previously declined to issue an emergency temporary restraining order sought by the National Trust, Reuters reported, but he proceeded Thursday to consider whether to pause the project longer while the case moves forward.
ABC News reported that Leon said he expects to rule in February and anticipates an appeal regardless of the outcome.
The National Trust has described the dispute as a test of congressional oversight and preservation obligations at what it calls an irreplaceable national landmark. The administration has claimed the ballroom as a long-needed addition for state functions and official events, and has said the work would modernize the complex at no cost to taxpayers.
