A Justice Department lawyer told a federal appeals court that judges do not have authority to stop President Donald Trump’s controversial White House ballroom project, arguing that only Congress can block construction of the $400 million addition.
The Trump administration is asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to reverse a lower court ruling that halted above-ground construction of the ballroom. The project would replace the demolished East Wing of the White House and include a large formal event space along with secure underground facilities.
The case has become a major test of presidential power, congressional control over federal property, historic preservation law and whether courts can intervene when an administration moves forward with construction on the White House complex.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation sued the Trump administration and the National Park Service after the East Wing was demolished in 2025. The group argues that the administration began the project without completing legally required review and approval processes. A district court later blocked above-ground construction while allowing underground security work to continue.
TRENDING TODAY
During Friday’s hearing, Justice Department lawyer Yaakov Roth argued that the project involves national security and presidential functions and that courts should not halt it. He said Congress, not the judiciary, has the power to stop the project if lawmakers believe it should not proceed.
Judge Patricia Millett pressed Roth on how far that argument goes. She asked whether courts would be powerless even if the government acted unlawfully. Roth maintained that under the administration’s theory, Congress would need to act directly if it wanted to stop the construction.
That answer drew sharp criticism from lawyers for the National Trust. Thad Heuer, representing the preservation group, invoked the landmark Supreme Court principle from Marbury v. Madison, arguing that it is the job of courts to decide what the law requires.
Heuer said the government’s position would leave unlawful executive action beyond judicial review. He framed the dispute as a question of who controls federal property: Congress, which owns and regulates it on behalf of the public, or the president, who temporarily occupies the White House.
The administration says the project is needed for security. Trump has argued that the new underground facility and ballroom are part of broader upgrades necessary to protect the president, staff and government leadership from modern threats, including drones and other advanced attack methods. AP reported that the administration has emphasized security concerns as a central reason for allowing the project to continue.
Preservationists counter that security concerns do not allow the White House to bypass federal law. They argue that major changes to one of the country’s most historically important buildings require congressional authorization and compliance with preservation rules.
The project has also faced political resistance on Capitol Hill. Senate Republicans recently removed $1 billion in funding for Secret Service security upgrades tied to the proposed ballroom from a broader immigration spending package after objections from lawmakers. That move signaled that even some Republicans were uncomfortable with attaching major public funding to the project.
The legal dispute has moved quickly because construction is already underway. The D.C. Circuit previously allowed work to continue temporarily while the appeal proceeded. Reuters reported that the appeals court is expected to issue a key ruling in the coming weeks, and the case could eventually reach the Supreme Court.
The White House ballroom has become one of Trump’s most visible construction priorities in Washington. Supporters say the White House needs a secure, modern space for large official events and emergency operations. They also argue the project is privately funded and tied to legitimate security needs.
Critics see the project differently. They argue that demolishing the East Wing and replacing it with a ballroom represents a major alteration to the White House that should not be carried out unilaterally by any president. They also warn that allowing the administration to proceed without judicial review would set a dangerous precedent.
The court’s ruling could shape more than one building project. If judges accept the administration’s argument, future presidents may claim broad authority to make major changes to White House property without meaningful court oversight. If the court sides with the National Trust, presidents may face clearer limits when altering historically protected federal property.
For now, the case remains unresolved. The appeals court must decide whether the judiciary can stop the project while legal questions are pending or whether Congress alone must act if it wants construction blocked.
The central question is larger than a ballroom: whether the president can move forward with major changes to the White House when preservationists and a lower court say the law requires more review first.
Why It Matters
The case matters because it tests the limits of presidential authority over the White House itself. The administration argues that courts cannot stop the project and that Congress must act if it wants construction blocked.
It also matters because the White House is not just a residence or office. It is a historic federal property, and the outcome could determine how much legal review future presidents must follow before making major structural changes.
What Comes Next
The D.C. Circuit is expected to rule on whether the lower court’s block on above-ground construction should remain in place. The decision could allow the ballroom project to continue or send the dispute back for further proceedings.
If either side loses, the case could move toward the Supreme Court, especially because it raises major questions about separation of powers, historic preservation law and control over federal property.
Trump defended the White House ballroom project in a social media post, arguing that construction is progressing well and that the project is tied to security and long-term White House needs.
The Ballroom is coming along fantastically well. It’s on time, and under budget (Unlike the Federal Reserve Building, where “Too Late” has done a terrible job of Cost and Time Control!), and at a much higher quality than I ever promised, including the DronePort, and ALL of the… pic.twitter.com/Gv9mEMMZXt
— Commentary Donald J Trump Truth Social Posts On X (@TrumpTruthOnX) June 5, 2026
