A U.S. federal appeals court ordered Donald Trump's administration on Friday to stop construction on a $400 million ballroom on the site of the White House's demolished East Wing, dealing the Republican leader a major setback in a case testing his presidential authority.
"Each President is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House," and cannot fundamentally reshape it without congressional approval, the Washington-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said in a 2-1 opinion.
The order upheld a preliminary injunction won by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which sued last year after the administration tore down the East Wing and began building a 90,000-square-foot (8,360-square-meter) ballroom without seeking authorization from Congress.
"Whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help," the panel's majority wrote.
The appeals court placed its ruling on hold for 14 days to allow the Trump administration to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Trump, who has increasingly claimed that the ballroom project is a security necessity, referred to the structure as a "military center" in a post on Truth Social on Friday and said the administration would appeal to the Supreme Court. He called the decision "horrendous" and politically motivated and said it left him, other White House officials and visitors exposed to attack.
"This unjust decision must be overturned by the Supreme Court in its entirety," Trump wrote. He said the ballroom plan includes bomb shelters, medical facilities, shielding from drones and missiles and other security features that are "all tied together as one big, expensive, and very complex unit."
National Trust President Brent Leggs said in a statement that the ruling marked "a great day for our country and for the American people's right to voice their opinions about the historic places they cherish, including the White House."
Trump appealed after U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, an appointee of Republican former President George W. Bush, twice blocked above-ground construction on the site while allowing underground work to continue.
The ballroom plan, which the administration has described as necessary for large formal functions and to preserve the safety of the White House, is the grandest of several Trump efforts to reshape central Washington's landscape of government buildings and national monuments.
A judge in a separate lawsuit recently said Trump’s name was illegally added to the exterior of the Kennedy Center performing arts venue and ordered its removal.
APPEAL TO NATIONAL SECURITY
In the ballroom case, Justice Department attorney Yaakov Roth said during D.C. Circuit arguments on June 5 that the courts have no role in weighing the privately funded project.
He said the National Trust’s "architectural preference" should not take precedence over national security concerns, claiming evidence that the former East Wing left the president and others in the White House vulnerable to attack.
The Democratic-appointed judges in the appeals court’s majority — Circuit Judges Patricia Millett and Brad Garcia — said their order does not permanently bar construction of a ballroom, but halts above-ground work during the lawsuit and until the White House secures approval from Congress.
National security arguments “are not an automatic get-out-of-law-free card,” the opinion said.
“The bold assertion that the Executive can act with utter lawlessness, destroying treasured national landmarks and harming the interests of individuals, and that no court can stop it flouts our constitutional order,” the judges wrote.
Circuit Judge Neomi Rao, whom Trump appointed during his first term, said in her dissent that the trial judge’s injunction blocking the project “is beyond the proper province of the federal courts” and that construction should be allowed to continue.
“The district court seized supervision of construction at the White House, and my colleagues affirm this judicial overreach,” Rao wrote.
Trump has defended his ballroom's price tag, which has doubled from initial projections. Trump said in a post on Truth Social in May that the cost rose because "it is approximately twice the size, and a far higher quality, than the original proposal" and promised "it will be magnificent, safe, and secure!"
-Reuters
"Each President is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House," and cannot fundamentally reshape it without congressional approval, the Washington-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said in a 2-1 opinion.
The order upheld a preliminary injunction won by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which sued last year after the administration tore down the East Wing and began building a 90,000-square-foot (8,360-square-meter) ballroom without seeking authorization from Congress.
"Whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help," the panel's majority wrote.
The appeals court placed its ruling on hold for 14 days to allow the Trump administration to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Trump, who has increasingly claimed that the ballroom project is a security necessity, referred to the structure as a "military center" in a post on Truth Social on Friday and said the administration would appeal to the Supreme Court. He called the decision "horrendous" and politically motivated and said it left him, other White House officials and visitors exposed to attack.
"This unjust decision must be overturned by the Supreme Court in its entirety," Trump wrote. He said the ballroom plan includes bomb shelters, medical facilities, shielding from drones and missiles and other security features that are "all tied together as one big, expensive, and very complex unit."
National Trust President Brent Leggs said in a statement that the ruling marked "a great day for our country and for the American people's right to voice their opinions about the historic places they cherish, including the White House."
Trump appealed after U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, an appointee of Republican former President George W. Bush, twice blocked above-ground construction on the site while allowing underground work to continue.
The ballroom plan, which the administration has described as necessary for large formal functions and to preserve the safety of the White House, is the grandest of several Trump efforts to reshape central Washington's landscape of government buildings and national monuments.
A judge in a separate lawsuit recently said Trump’s name was illegally added to the exterior of the Kennedy Center performing arts venue and ordered its removal.
APPEAL TO NATIONAL SECURITY
In the ballroom case, Justice Department attorney Yaakov Roth said during D.C. Circuit arguments on June 5 that the courts have no role in weighing the privately funded project.
He said the National Trust’s "architectural preference" should not take precedence over national security concerns, claiming evidence that the former East Wing left the president and others in the White House vulnerable to attack.
The Democratic-appointed judges in the appeals court’s majority — Circuit Judges Patricia Millett and Brad Garcia — said their order does not permanently bar construction of a ballroom, but halts above-ground work during the lawsuit and until the White House secures approval from Congress.
National security arguments “are not an automatic get-out-of-law-free card,” the opinion said.
“The bold assertion that the Executive can act with utter lawlessness, destroying treasured national landmarks and harming the interests of individuals, and that no court can stop it flouts our constitutional order,” the judges wrote.
Circuit Judge Neomi Rao, whom Trump appointed during his first term, said in her dissent that the trial judge’s injunction blocking the project “is beyond the proper province of the federal courts” and that construction should be allowed to continue.
“The district court seized supervision of construction at the White House, and my colleagues affirm this judicial overreach,” Rao wrote.
Trump has defended his ballroom's price tag, which has doubled from initial projections. Trump said in a post on Truth Social in May that the cost rose because "it is approximately twice the size, and a far higher quality, than the original proposal" and promised "it will be magnificent, safe, and secure!"
-Reuters
Latest News
Plastics contamination an ‘overlooked’ concern in food waste schemes, experts say
Local
09 August 2026
Risk of deaths linked to heatwaves underestimated, Swiss Re CEO says
Local
09 August 2026
Three in five Americans favour stronger oversight of social media companies, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds A bipartisan majority of Americans support more government rules for how social media companies conduct business, including a requirement of age-verification tools to keep younger children off social media, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll. The poll, which was conducted over the six days ending August 3, comes as companies like Meta Platforms and Google's YouTube face mounting legal pressure over their treatment of young users. A trial is expected to begin on Wednesday over allegations by state prosecutors that Meta designed its products to addict young users. Meta, which denies the allegations, says it could face up to $1.4 trillion in penalties if the states prevail. A New Mexico state court on Thursday separately ordered Meta to pay $567 million into a teen mental health fund and change how its platforms function for young users, after finding the company is to blame for harming children's wellbeing. Tech companies are also under increasing scrutiny by lawmakers across the U.S. for their effect on youth. More than a dozen states have passed laws regulating minors' social media access, saying it is needed to bolster their safety online. NetChoice, a trade group backed by social media giants such as Meta, TikTok and Snap, has sued to stop laws requiring apps verify the ages of their users. It argues such laws violate free speech protections. Some 61% of poll respondents - including 71% of Democrats and 62% of Republicans - said social media companies need firmer oversight. Support among independents was lower as many of them said they were unsure where they stood. The poll also found 66% support laws that would require social media companies use age-verification tools to keep children under age 16 from accessing their platforms. Support was highest among Republicans, with 74% backing the idea, compared to 69% of Democrats. 'SOMEBODY'S GOT TO DO IT' James Bosserdet, a 60-year-old mechanical engineer from Tennessee who voted for Republican President Donald Trump in the 2024 election, said he mostly wants the U.S. government to have a smaller role in Americans' lives, but that cracking down on social media companies is an exception. "Somebody's got to do it," he said, referring to setting restrictions on social media for kids. "Is it the government's job? I don't want it to be. I think maybe it should be." The U.S. Congress has so far not passed legislation aimed at protecting kids on social media. An overwhelming majority of Americans - 85% - think social media can be addictive for children, and a similar share think its use can be harmful for their mental health, the Reuters/Ipsos poll found. Washington, D.C., resident Christopher Chen, 34, said he thinks social media companies have an outsized influence on teens, adding that the tech firms have too much control over what their users see on their apps. "I don't know what the regulation looks like, but something needs to be done by the government to protect the people," said Chen, who voted for Trump's 2024 Democratic opponent, Kamala Harris. Paula Dick, 73, said social media companies could do a better job keeping kids away from inappropriate content, adding that there should be more government oversight of the apps they use. Dick said she doesn't allow her grandchildren to use YouTube when she watches them, but they have found ways to access it anyway. Dick, who lives in Kansas, voted for Trump in 2024. "They have workarounds to get around blocks that their parents have put on their phones," she said. "They're pretty intelligent when it comes to that." USERS LIKE SOCIAL MEDIA But Americans also say they like social media a lot, with 70% saying their time spent on the platforms is fun, while only 35% say it stressed them out. People are split on whether they are overdoing it, with 52% saying they spend too much time every day on social media, and 43% saying that's not the case. The Reuters/Ipsos poll, which was conducted online, surveyed 4,505 U.S. adults and had a margin of error of 2 percentage points in either direction. -Reuters
Local
09 August 2026
Ukraine's Odesa port sustains damage from Russian attack, Zelenskiy says
Local
09 August 2026
Messi misses Miami defeat after death of father
Local
09 August 2026
Suspected crime boss Daniel Kinahan to be returned to Ireland in high-security operation
Local
09 August 2026
Michael Brennan surges into co-lead entering final round of Wyndham
Local
09 August 2026
Government prioritises raising judges’ retirement age over other issues - Sajith Premadasa
Local
09 August 2026
Talks with US won't happen while interim deal is breached, Iranian minister says
Local
09 August 2026
Detention orders obtained for SLFP Medirigiriya organiser
Local
09 August 2026