Trump ballroom project blocked by appeals court
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
The White House helipad and ballroom under construction in Washington, D.C., on Aug. 5. Photo: Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg via Getty Images
A federal appeals court upheld a ban on President Trump's long-sought White House ballroom Friday, determining he'd need Congress' authorization to continue the sprawling project.
The big picture: The administration's demolition of the East Wing and $400 million expansion project has roiled Washington as the president puts his gilded stamp on the nation's capital city.
- The White House did not immediately respond to Axios' request for comment.
Driving the news: A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld a lower court's ruling that halted the administration's fast-tracked plans earlier this spring.
- "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, deciding the administration "very likely" lacked the authority to build the ballroom.
- Judge Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee, dissented.
- The court paused its decision for two weeks to give the government the chance to ask the Supreme Court to review it.
Catch up quick: Judge Richard Leon clarified in April that the government was barred from taking any action to develop the ballroom, but he allowed below-ground construction of national security facilities or work necessary to protect the site and the president.
- The appeals court determined that the government did not prove that Leon abused his discretion in that determination, agreeing that the White House needed congressional approval.
What they're saying: The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a privately funded nonprofit organization, challenged the project last year.
- "The White House, a global landmark that symbolizes American identity and the ideals of democracy, belongs to the American people," President and CEO Brent Leggs said in a statement celebrating the Friday ruling.
The bottom line: "This holding has nothing at all to do with whether the proposed ballroom is desirable, or not, as a matter of policy," wrote circuit judges Patricia Millett, an Obama appointee, and Bradley Garcia, a Biden appointee.
- "What it does mean," they continued, is that the government can't construct the ballroom "during the district court's expeditious litigation without securing Congress's authorization."
Go deeper: Republicans turn ballroom fight into referendum on Trump's safety
Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional information throughout.
