The US Supreme Court narrowly voted to allow construction of the White House ballroom to continue, a decision Donald Trump hailed as evidence that the country is "living in a golden age." The 5-4 ruling on Monday (August 24) rejected a challenge from the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which had argued the President lacked the unilateral power to demolish the east wing of the White House for the project.
The $400 million ballroom project has faced fierce criticism from opponents who say it does not have Congressional approval. However, the majority found that the National Trust for Historic Preservation likely did not have the legal right to challenge the project. The unsigned order pointed to government arguments that the ballroom would address national security concerns by shielding a planned underground military installation and offering a more secure structure for large events than the tents currently used.
Dissent and Legal Questions
Chief Justice John Roberts, who had signed a temporary order earlier this month allowing construction to proceed, publicly disagreed with the latest decision. He wrote a strong dissent saying the project is likely unlawful because it hasn't been approved by Congress. "Today's decision is no victory for the separation of powers," Roberts wrote. The court's three liberal-leaning justices agreed with him.
By contrast, the majority stated that "the only harm the Trust claims is the offense one of its members will suffer from having to view a structure of the 'scale,' 'height,' and 'massing' the government intends." The majority's order did not directly decide the legality of the project, and the suit will return to lower courts.
Trump's Response and Project Timeline
Trump applauded the decision, writing in a social media post, "I am pleased to report that the United States Supreme Court has just ruled in favor of the Ballroom/Military Complex being built without any further contingency, doubt, or threat." He added: "We are living in the Golden Age of America, and this Building will be one of the Greatest ever constructed in Washington, D.C. When completed in the Summer of 2028, the magnificent Ballroom and Military Complex will be something that the entire Country is very proud of."
Documents filed in the case say that key portions of the project could be complete within months. The administration has said crews are working 20 hours a day on the planned 90,000-square-foot (8,400-square-meter) ballroom. The framework is expected to be completed in November and much of the facade done by April, with full completion slated for August 2028, according to court documents.
Legal Background and Reactions
The trust's president and CEO, Brent Leggs, said the group was disappointed with the decision but pleased with Roberts' dissent. "This is not the final decision on the merits of our case and does not resolve our fundamental argument — that each President is a temporary steward of the People's House and does not have the unilateral authority to demolish and redesign it without the approval of Congress," he said in a statement.
US District Judge Richard Leon had ordered a stop to aboveground construction in April, though the order allowed work on bunkers and military installations below ground to continue. The ruling was suspended but later upheld by a divided appeals court panel. Two judges appointed by Democratic presidents found the project was for Congress to decide and "not a matter for Executive self-help." A third judge, appointed by Trump, found that the preservationist group had no legal right to sue.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued to the justices that the decision halting the work was "extraordinary and unlawful" and said the completion of the project was "vitally required by national security." The trust and the four dissenters note that federal law prohibits the construction of any structure on federal parks or public grounds in D.C. "without express authority of Congress." The administration has scored a series of other victories on the high court's emergency docket, though the justices have ruled against some of the president's signature policies after fuller review.
