Trump administration urges judge to reject bid to halt White House ballroom

The Trump administration urged a federal judge Monday to deny a request to immediately halt construction of a new White House ballroom, arguing that demolition of the East Wing has already occurred and that the National Trust for Historic Preservation cannot meet the legal standard for emergency relief.

In an opposition filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the Justice Department argued that the trust’s request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction fails because the above-grade demolition the group seeks to stop has already been completed and cannot be undone.

Government attorneys said the court cannot enjoin the demolition of a structure that no longer exists and that the requested relief would not redress the alleged harm.

The Trump administration also argued that the trust cannot show imminent irreparable injury, noting that remaining work through at least March will focus on below-grade construction and site stabilization.

According to the filing, above-ground structural work is not expected to begin until at least April 2026, and architectural plans for the ballroom are still being finalized.

The response came days after the National Trust for Historic Preservation filed suit seeking to halt construction of President Donald Trump’s proposed White House ballroom. The trust argues that the administration illegally demolished the East Wing and began construction without required approvals, environmental review or public input.

The lawsuit names the National Park Service, the Department of the Interior, the General Services Administration and Trump in his official capacity as defendants. The trust is asking the court to pause further work on the project until federal review processes are completed and Congress authorizes the construction.

At the center of the dispute is a planned 90,000-square-foot “White House State Ballroom,” announced by the administration in July as a way to host substantially more guests than the White House can currently accommodate. The project was initially described as having a seated capacity of 650 people, a figure Trump later said could be increased.

According to the complaint, demolition of the East Wing began in late October without the plans being submitted to the National Capital Planning Commission or the Commission of Fine Arts, the two bodies charged by law with reviewing major federal construction in Washington.

The trust also says no environmental assessment or environmental impact statement was released before demolition began, as required under the National Environmental Policy Act.

The filing says the administration moved ahead without notice or review. “Within days, the East Wing and its colonnade—a version of which was first built on the site during the presidency of Thomas Jefferson—were completely destroyed,” trust said in the complaint.

The East Wing, first added in 1902 and expanded during World War II, housed offices of the First Lady and included a small theater used by presidents and their families for decades. Its demolition also removed the Jacqueline Kennedy Garden, a landscaped area dedicated in 1965 and used for official events. The complaint says one or more commemorative trees on the site may also have been destroyed.

The trust argues that federal law does not permit unilateral action on the White House or its grounds.

“They did so without seeking approval from Congress; without requesting review and approval from the federal commissions charged with oversight of development in the nation’s capital; without conducting the required environmental studies; and without allowing the public any opportunity for input,” the filing states.

The complaint repeatedly emphasizes that the White House is public property.

“The American public, to whom the White House belongs, still has had no chance to provide its input,” the trust wrote, adding that public participation is especially important where “the structure at issue is perhaps the most recognizable and historically significant building in the country.”

Before filing suit, the trust sent an October letter to federal officials urging them to pause demolition and submit the project for review. In that letter, the group acknowledged that modern facilities may be needed but warned that the scale of the proposed ballroom posed serious risks to the White House’s historic design.

“We are deeply concerned that the massing and height of the proposed new construction would overwhelm the White House itself,” the trust wrote, adding that the project could “permanently disrupt the carefully balanced classical design of the White House with its central Executive Residence and two smaller, lower East and West Wings.”

The letter stressed that design decisions at the White House carry symbolic weight. “The White House’s form, scale and setting are inseparable from its symbolic meaning,” the trust wrote, warning that “once demolished, these historic resources cannot be restored.” It said it received no response.

Trump publicly announced that construction had begun in an October 20 post on Truth Social, writing that “ground has been broken on the White House grounds to build the new, big, beautiful White House Ballroom.”

In the same post, he described the East Wing as “completely separate from the White House itself” and said it was being “fully modernized as part of this process.”

During a press conference later that day, Trump acknowledged that demolition was underway during his remarks, telling reporters the work was happening “right behind us” and could be heard during the event.

In its opposition filing, the administration said it intends to begin consultation with the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts before any above-grade construction begins. The complaint says neither body reviewed the project before demolition occurred.

The Justice Department also argued that the General Services Administration should be dismissed from the case, saying it played no role in the project’s planning or execution.

Administration officials have separately defended the project in public statements. During a briefing Monday, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reiterated that the ballroom project is intended to modernize the White House and dismissed the lawsuit as manufactured outrage. She also emphasized that the project is being funded by private sources and would come at no cost to taxpayers.

The trust disputes the administration’s legal interpretation, saying even minor structures on the White House grounds are typically subject to extensive review.

The lawsuit seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to block further work until environmental reviews are completed, plans are submitted to oversight commissions and Congress authorizes the construction.

The case follows earlier litigation over Trump’s plans to alter other federally protected buildings. As previously reported by Urgent Matter, Trump was sued earlier this year over proposed plans to repaint and modify the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, a dispute that similarly raised questions about presidential authority over historic federal property and compliance with federal preservation laws.

Together, the lawsuits point to growing legal challenges over how far presidential authority extends when altering nationally significant landmarks, as preservation groups argue that long-standing review processes are being bypassed in favor of executive discretion.

Stories like this take time, documents and a commitment to public transparency. Please support independent arts journalism by subscribing to Urgent Matter and supporting our work directly.