US appeals court blocks $400 million White House ballroom, says Congress must decide

A U.S. federal appeals court on Friday ordered the Trump administration to stop construction of a $400 million ballroom at the White House, ruling that the project cannot proceed without congressional approval. The decision, issued by a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, upheld a preliminary injunction won by the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

The National Trust had sued after the administration demolished the White House’s East Wing and began building a 90,000-square-foot ballroom on the site. The group argued that the project violated federal law, which requires Congress to authorise major alterations to the White House. The appeals court agreed, with the majority stating that “whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help.”

“Congress has not ceded unfettered authority to the Executive Branch to dramatically redesign, reshape, and reconstruct the White House — the People’s House — to fit a particular President’s desires,” the court wrote. The ruling has been put on hold for 14 days to allow the administration to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The case stems from the administration’s decision to tear down the East Wing, a historically significant part of the White House complex. The administration said the ballroom was necessary for large official functions and to address security vulnerabilities. It also noted that the project would be funded entirely by private donations, not taxpayer money.

However, the preservation group challenged the move, asserting that no President has the unilateral authority to undertake such a dramatic reconstruction of one of the nation’s most iconic buildings. In an earlier ruling, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, an appointee of President George W. Bush, blocked above-ground construction while allowing underground work to continue. Judge Leon said no federal statute “comes close to giving the President” the required authority.

During oral arguments before the appeals court in June, Justice Department attorney Yaakov Roth argued that the courts had no role in weighing the privately funded project. He said the National Trust’s “architectural preference” should not outweigh national security concerns, citing evidence that the former East Wing left the President and other occupants vulnerable to attack.

Thaddeus Heuer, a lawyer for the Trust, countered that the administration was avoiding the proper legal process. “They just don’t want to go to Congress,” he said. The project’s cost has doubled from initial projections, and President Trump has defended it, saying in a social media post that the ballroom is “approximately twice the size, and a far higher quality, than the original proposal” and promising it will be “magnificent, safe, and secure.”

The appeals court’s decision marks the latest legal battle over the President’s efforts to reshape federal landmarks in Washington. In a separate case, a judge ruled that Mr. Trump’s name was illegally added to the exterior of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and ordered its removal. The new ruling could have broader implications for the balance of power between the Executive and Legislative branches over the management of federal properties.

The case raises fundamental questions about the separation of powers. Unlike routine maintenance or security upgrades, the construction of a ballroom constitutes a major alteration that requires explicit congressional approval, legal experts said. The administration, however, contends that the President, as the head of the executive branch, has inherent authority to manage the White House as he sees fit.

The National Trust praised the appeals court’s decision, calling it a defense of the rule of law and a protection of the “People’s House.” The White House and the Justice Department have not commented on the ruling. With the stay in place, the administration has two weeks to file an appeal with the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court declines to intervene, the administration would have to abandon the ballroom project or seek approval from Congress.