Trump’s $300 Million White House Ballroom Project Heads to Court Amid Preservation Backlash

Описание: Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statutes that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

President Donald Trump’s ambitious plan to construct a $300 million ballroom on the White House grounds is set to face its first major legal hurdle, as a federal court prepares to hear arguments challenging what critics describe as an unprecedented and unlawful alteration of America’s most iconic residence.
On Tuesday afternoon, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon is scheduled to consider a lawsuit filed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which accuses the Trump administration and multiple federal agencies of bypassing mandatory legal reviews before initiating the massive redevelopment. The proposed 90,000-square-foot ballroom project, critics argue, has already resulted in the demolition of large portions of the White House’s 120-year-old East Wing—an action they claim constitutes an abuse of executive power.
Since returning to office in January, President Trump has pursued a sweeping aesthetic overhaul of the White House, imprinting his signature style on the presidency’s most visible symbol. Gold accents have been added to the Oval Office, and the Rose Garden lawn has been partially replaced with a paved patio reminiscent of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. Yet none of those changes compare to the scale and symbolism of the ballroom project, which preservationists warn would fundamentally alter the historic character of the executive mansion.
Images of heavy construction equipment tearing into the East Wing sparked immediate outrage among conservation groups and historians. In its court filing, the National Trust asserted that no president—regardless of party or authority—is legally permitted to dismantle portions of the White House without adhering to established review processes. The organization is seeking a temporary restraining order to halt construction, arguing that the damage inflicted so far is “irreversible” and threatens both the structure and the grounds of the White House.
The Trump administration, however, has forcefully rejected those claims. In a filing submitted Monday, government attorneys maintained that the project falls squarely within presidential authority and follows a historical precedent of executive-led renovations. They pointed to Franklin D. Roosevelt’s own construction of the East Wing as evidence that presidents have long exercised broad discretion over the White House.