US appeals court hears challenge to Trump’s White House ballroom

Listen to this article

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration asked an appeals court on Friday to allow construction of a $400 million ballroom on the site of the White House’s demolished East Wing, pitting Trump against preservationists in a case testing the limits of presidential authority.

A lawyer for the administration, Yaakov Roth, told a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that the challengers seeking to block the project do not have legal standing to pursue their lawsuit.

“It’s an architectural preference on one hand and the safety and security of the President of the United States on the other hand,” Roth said. “We have evidence here that the old East Wing was not adequate to protect the safety and security of the President and others in the White House leadership of the executive branch.”

Judge Patricia Millett suggested the government’s argument amounted to “move fast and break things and nobody has standing.”

The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a nonprofit group that campaigns to protect significant American sites, sued last year after the Trump administration tore down the East Wing in October 2025 and began building a 90,000-square-foot (8,360-square-meter) ballroom without seeking authorization from Congress.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, appointed by Republican former President George W. Bush, twice blocked above-ground construction on Trump’s ballroom while allowing underground work to continue.

Leon said no federal statute even “comes close to giving the President” the required authority to construct the ballroom without approval by Congress.

The administration’s appeal is being heard by Democratic-appointed D.C. Circuit judges Millett and Bradley Garcia alongside Trump-appointed Judge Neomi Rao. In an order last month, the appeals court allowed construction to continue during the legal battle without ruling on the merits of the case.

The panel could issue a more significant ruling in the next few weeks, which could be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.