With His Grandiose White House Ballroom Plan, Trump Again Asserts the Power To Do As He Pleases |
Executive Power
With His Grandiose White House Ballroom Plan, Trump Again Asserts the Power To Do As He Pleases
"No statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have," U.S. District Judge Richard Leon concluded when he enjoined the project.
Jacob Sullum | 4.6.2026 3:30 PM
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
(White House)
Since President Donald Trump announced his plan to replace the East Wing of the White House with an enormous ballroom last July, critics have raised several architectural objections. Among other things, they have complained about the asymmetry of the design, which would result in a lopsided White House dominated by the new structure; obstruction of the symbolic line of sight between the Capitol and the president's residence; and the original design of the outsized portico, which featured a staircase to nowhere and 24 view-blocking columns. Last week, a federal judge added a legal wrinkle to these aesthetic concerns, saying the project cannot proceed without congressional authorization.
That decision, which the Justice Department asked a federal appeals court to block in an emergency motion filed late on Friday, reflects Trump's tendency to do whatever he wants, regardless of what the law says. "The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families," U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon writes in the 35-page opinion explaining his decision to issue the preliminary injunction that the National Trust for Historic Preservation sought in a lawsuit it filed last December. "He is not, however, the owner!"
Although Trump "claims that Congress has given him authority in existing statutes to construct his East Wing ballroom project and to do it with private funds," Leon says, "I have concluded that the National Trust is likely to succeed on the merits because no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have." Leon therefore concludes that "the ballroom construction project must stop until Congress authorizes its completion."
The Constitution "vests Congress with complete authority over public lands," Leon notes. It also "gives Congress legislative authority over the District of Columbia" and the appropriation of federal funds. Those provisions "establish Congress's primacy over federal property, spending, and the District of Columbia," Leon writes, and the defendants "have declined to argue that they have any inherent constitutional authority to build the ballroom." That authority therefore must be based on legislation enacted by Congress.
The Trump administration relies mainly on 3 USC 105(d)(1), which authorizes the president to use appropriated money for "the care, maintenance, repair, alteration, refurnishing, improvement, air-conditioning, heating, and lighting (including electric power and fixtures) of the Executive Residence at the White House." Does the ballroom project, which entails demolishing the East Wing and replacing it with a structure that would be 60 percent larger than the White House residence in square footage and more than three times as large in cubic volume, fit that description?
Leon thinks not. "Section 105(d)(1) plainly authorizes the President to conduct ordinary........