In brief
Facing a halt from an appeals court, Donald Trump has turned to the Supreme Court to allow the construction of a $400 million grand ballroom to proceed without Congressional approval. The move follows a lawsuit from the National Trust for Historic Preservation, arguing that the project bypassed mandatory review. Trump’s legal team claims the ballroom is vital for national security, incorporates bomb‑shelter facilities, and is fully funded by private donors—so a congressional veto is unnecessary. The case underscores the ongoing debate over executive power versus legislative oversight in federal construction projects.
US President Donald Trump has requested the Supreme Court to allow the ongoing construction of a $400 million ballroom at the White House to proceed, bypassing congressional approval.
Trump’s emergency application follows a week after a federal appeals court halted the project pending Congressional sign‑off, a decision upheld by a Denver court that ruled the National Trust for Historic Preservation had a valid claim. The trust sued the administration in October, arguing the construction began without the legally required review and public comment, including the National Capital Planning Commission.
In the Supreme Court filing, Solicitor General David Sauer argues that work is already 65 % complete and that stopping it would constitute a “construction‑by‑injunction.” He calls the injunction “dangerous” and insists the President must continue while the administration appeals the order.
Trump has long maintained that the White House lacks a large event space, and that a ballroom is essential for national security. He points out that the project also includes military facilities—bomb shelters and a medical treatment centre—and that the entire $400 million budget is covered by private corporate donors, so taxpayer funds or Congressional approval are not required.
The ballroom debate is part of a broader pattern of Trump’s proposed changes to Washington’s heritage sites, including the renovation of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool and the planned “Arc de Trump” parody of Paris’s Arc de Triomphe. Critics argue that the administration sidestepped review and public‑comment requirements on all these projects, a charge Trump denies.
