In an opinion filed March 31, a US District Court judge for the District of Columbia has rejected the Trump administration’s arguments for a 90,000-square-foot, $400 million ballroom to be erected on the former site of the East Wing, which Trump unceremoniously demolished last year.
Judge Richard J. Leon, a George W. Bush appointee, came out of the gate strong, in an opinion that starts, “The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner!” He goes on to use seventeen more exclamation points in the course of the 35-page opinion, which is highly dismissive of the administration’s arguments.
Trump claims that existing laws give him the right to construct his ballroom on the former site of the East Wing, and to complete the project with private funds. The National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States sees it otherwise, and sued to halt the project.
“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,” writes Leon, who explains that Congress passed the Residence Act in 1790 to build the White House, and “Congress has continued to authorize and fund construction and maintenance” ever since, he notes, citing the South Portico (1823), the North Portico (1829) and the East and West Wings (1902).
The White House announced the plans for the sprawling ballroom on July 31, 2025, saying that Trump and “patriot donors” would fund the project (“zero cost to the American Taxpayer!”). He notoriously and without warning began to demolish the East Wing on October 21. The National Trust expressed concerns to various federal entities, Leon notes, including concerns that the massive ballroom would overwhelm the White House and disrupt its carefully balanced design. After getting no response, the organization filed suit to stop the project in December.
Leon notes four statutes that bear on the ballroom project, including one from 1912 that states that “[a] building or structure shall not be erected on any reservation, park, or public grounds of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia without express authority of Congress.” He also notes that “The Property Clause vests Congress with complete authority over public lands.”
“So,” writes Leon, “the President must identify some law that allows him to demolish the East Wing and construct his planned ballroom with private funds.”
The judge notes that the National Trust’s suit relies on an ultra vires claim, literally meaning “beyond the powers of,” which he acknowledges is “a high bar,” noting that the Supreme Court has described it as “a Hail Mary pass.” But, he writes, it is not insurmountable.
“Defendants’ reading of the statutes assumes that Congress has granted nearly unlimited power to the President to construct anything, anywhere on federal land in the District of Columbia, regardless of the source of funds,” the judge writes. “This clearly is not how Congress and former Presidents have managed the White House for centuries, and this Court will not be the first to hold that Congress has ceded its powers in such a significant fashion!”
Leon writes that 3 USC Section 105(d)(l), on which the White House largely relies for the authority to build the ballroom, “plainly authorizes the President to conduct ordinary maintenance and upkeep of the White House, and nothing more!” The act authorizes “alteration” and “improvement,” sure, writes the judge, but to leap from there to a 90,000-square-foot ballroom is “a brazen interpretation, indeed!” Based on the White House’s reading, Leon writes, you could call tearing down the White House and building a skyscraper an “alteration” or an “improvement.”
And there’s much more, as when the judge writes, “Defendants argue that canons of construction have no place in ultra vires review. Please!”
The Trump administration immediately filed an appeal. In a typically rambling Truth Social post, Trump decried the National Trust as “a Radical Left Group of Lunatics” and describes his ballroom as “the finest Building of its kind anywhere in the World.”
Actual builders and architects disagree about the proposed ballroom. Judge Leon’s opinion follows an investigation by the New York Times of the project’s architectural merits (actually, the lack thereof) and the haste with which it has been discussed and approved by local authorities, bodies all stocked with Trump supporters. “Critics warn it still has many issues—its portico is too big, its stairs lead nowhere, its columns will block views from inside the ballroom,” says the Times.
“And,” adds the paper, “that’s just the portico.”
