10
Loading video...
By Anna Commander
News Editor
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a major victory and allowed his White House Ballroom construction to move forward on Monday, despite conservative Chief Justice John Roberts joining the three liberal justices dissenting and describing the construction as "likely unlawful."
The 5-4 decision in Trump's favor overturned a lower-court order that had halted any above-ground construction.
Trump reacted to the news on Truth Social, saying in part, "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." He later said that the project is under budget and ahead of schedule.
Read More on U.S.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation had challenged the project, arguing numerous aspects of the construction.
The ruling does not decide whether the ballroom itself is legal, the order says. Construction can continue while the broader legal fight proceeds, with the administration arguing the project is necessary for security and is funded through private donations rather than taxpayer money.
The White House forwarded Trump's Truth Social post to Newsweek on Monday when reached for comment.
Why Was the White House Ballroom Project Paused?
Construction of Trump’s White House ballroom was previously halted after the National Trust for Historic Preservation sued the administration, arguing that Trump did not have the authority to demolish the East Wing and build the new structure without approval from Congress. A federal judge issued an injunction blocking above-ground construction while allowing work on an underground military facility to continue. The D.C. Circuit later upheld the injunction, prompting the Trump administration to ask the Supreme Court to intervene.
The administration argued that stopping construction could create security and other problems, while the National Trust argued that the project required congressional authorization. The Supreme Court fight therefore centered not only on the ballroom itself, but also on whether the National Trust had the legal standing to challenge the project.
...
Supreme Court on White House Ballroom
The Supreme Court on Monday allowed construction of the ballroom to continue, but did not rule on whether the project is ultimately legal. The majority concluded that the National Trust was unlikely to have standing to bring the challenge and said the administration could face significant harm if construction were stopped. The case will continue in the lower courts.
Roberts dissented, arguing that the National Trust does have standing and that the ballroom project is “likely unlawful” because Congress has not expressly authorized the president to undertake the construction. Roberts specifically defended Alison Hoagland, a preservationist who said the project would harm her ability to view and study the historic White House. While the majority characterized her claimed injury as an aesthetic objection, Roberts argued that her longstanding work and interest in the White House gave her a concrete legal injury.
Roberts' dissent is notable because he had previously issued an administrative stay that temporarily allowed construction to continue while the Supreme Court considered the case.
Alan Dershowitz, prominent constitutional law and criminal lawyer, told Newsweek via email on Monday, "The hard question is whether the courts have any proper role to play in construction decisions involving the executive mansion. There have [been] many previous renovations— perhaps none as extensive— without judicial intervention. Also it’s complicated to halt renovations midstream with a hole in the ground. So I think the decision was inevitable."
Read the Order in Full:
Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Samantha Beech, Sam Wilson, Gray R. Thomas.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines