The Supreme Court has been asked to uphold a lower court order that would temporarily halt the construction of a new White House ballroom. Lawyers for the National Trust for Historic Preservation submitted their arguments on Tuesday afternoon, contending that the Trump administration is attempting to outrun judicial review by expediting construction to a point where deconstruction would be virtually impossible.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a private nonprofit focused on saving historic places, initiated legal action in December. The organization sought to pause construction until the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts could review and approve the plans, and Congress could authorize the ballroom’s construction.
Senior U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, a George W. Bush appointee, issued an order to halt above-ground ballroom construction, while allowing underground work like bomb shelters and bunkers, and necessary safety construction, to proceed. However, Leon’s order never took effect because the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit temporarily paused it to consider the Trump administration’s appeal.
On August 7, a divided three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit upheld Leon’s ruling, granting the federal government 14 days to appeal to the Supreme Court. Judges Patricia Millett and Bradley Garcia, writing for the majority, stated that only Congress has the authority to regulate White House construction and demolition, and no funds for the ballroom have been approved. They warned that unpaused construction would cause irreversible historical, architectural, and visual damage.
Dissenting Judge Neomi Rao argued that the National Trust lacked legal standing to sue and that the president has the power to make improvements to the residence, which likely includes the ballroom.
On August 14, the Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court, urging the justices to halt Leon’s order, calling it extraordinary and unlawful. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that the project, an integrated military complex including a secure ballroom, is vitally required by national security and that the trust’s claims are based on a member’s dislike, not a valid injury. Sauer also asserted that Congress authorized the project by allowing presidents to make alterations and improvements to the White House and construct buildings in national parks.
In its 40-page filing, the National Trust emphasized that the core issue is who decides on federal property construction, asserting that the constitutional system and federal law assign this power to Congress. The trust argued that if the administration believes a ballroom is needed, they should seek congressional approval. They also stated that the administration would not be harmed if the Supreme Court denies their request, as the injunction only stops ballroom construction without prior congressional approval, allowing other security-related work to continue.
The trust highlighted that the Trump administration has accelerated construction, aiming for substantial completion by November 2026, and claiming the project is beyond the point of return. To address concerns about delay, the trust indicated it would not oppose an expedited procedure for the government’s petition for review, potentially leading to oral arguments in October or November.