The Trump administration has argued before a federal appeals court that no court has the authority to halt the construction of a new ballroom and underground facility at the White House, asserting that only Congress can intervene. The case, heard by the Washington DC Circuit Court of Appeals, tests the limits of presidential authority over federal property.
The Department of Justice lawyer, Yaakov Roth, claimed that if the project amounted to 'complete lawlessness', courts still could not stop it; Congress would need to pass a law to block it. This argument came in response to a challenge from the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which sued after President Trump ordered the demolition of the East Wing without completing required review processes.
The administration cites national security concerns, referencing a failed assassination attempt at an April event, to justify the $400m ballroom and secure underground bunker. Construction of the bunker was allowed to proceed while the dispute continues, but a lower court blocked the ballroom. The Senate has signalled scepticism, removing $1bn in requested funding for Secret Service upgrades from an immigration bill.
The National Trust's lawyer, Thad Heuer, rejected the government's position, invoking the principle from Marbury v Madison that it is the role of the courts to say what the law is. The case will determine whether the president can bypass environmental and historic preservation laws for projects on federal land.
