Appeals Court Punts Trump Bid to Revive White House Ballroom (1)

A federal appeals court asked a Washington federal judge to further explain his ruling that blocked President Donald Trump from building a 90,000-square-foot ballroom on the site of the demolished White House East Wing.

The order from a divided three-judge panel for the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit on Saturday sidesteps, for now, the Trump administration’s request to pause a lower court decision that halted construction until Congress approved the project, while the government appeals it.

Justice Department lawyers had argued in an April 3 emergency motion that the lower court’s order pausing construction and leaving an open excavation site is “untenable” and threatened the security of Trump and his family and staff. The government also said it may ask the Supreme Court for emergency relief if the request is denied.

The appeals court sent the case back to Senior Judge Richard Leon, of the US District Court for the District of Columbia, for the judge to “promptly address” a request to clarify his ruling and its exception for construction needed for safety and security.

The panel also extended a stay on Leon’s order until April 17, three additional days, to give the federal government time to ask the Supreme Court to review the appeals court’s remand order.

The panel said they could not “fairly determine, on this hurried record” the extent to which the lower court’s exception for security-related work may address the Trump administration’s claims that ruling puts White House staff at risk. They also said it “remains unclear” how ballroom construction affects below-ground security upgrades.

“This court will not gainsay the importance of ensuring the safety of the White House, the President, staff, and visitors,” the panel said.

Judge Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee, dissented and said she would have granted the government’s request for reprieve from the lower court ruling while the case progressed. She reasoned that the Trump administration “has presented credible evidence of ongoing security vulnerabilities at the White House that would be prolonged by halting construction.”

The administration is appealing Leon’s March ruling that found Trump acted outside the scope of his powers when his administration tore down the historic East Wing and began to construct a ballroom, using up to $400 million in private donations.

In an opinion also full of exclamation points, Leon ordered the administration to halt the project, with the exception of work needed to ensure security and safety of the construction site. The judge wrote that while he takes “seriously” concerns about security and safety of White House grounds, the existence of an excavation site is “a problem of the President’s own making!”

Leon paused the effect of his order for 14 days to give the government time to challenge it at the appeals court. After his decision, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which challenged the project, asked the judge to clarify if his injunction would allow the government to continue building the ballroom because it would include some security features.

Carol Quillen, president and CEO of the National Trust, said in a statement Saturday that the nonprofit “remains committed to honoring the historic significance of the White House, advocating for our collective role as stewards, and demonstrating how broad consultation, including with the American people, results in a better overall outcome.”

“We appreciate the court of appeals acting quickly and await further clarification from the district court,” she said.

The Justice Department lawyers told the appeals court in their request for relief that “deep Top Secret excavations, foundations, and structures” have already been built, and the building will be “heavily fortified” with “steel, bullet, ballistic, and blast proof glass, and drone proof roofing materials, which must be finished quickly, and not allowed to be exposed to the conditions and elements of an open construction site.”

The ballroom design “cohesively advances critical national-security objectives,” such as by protecting the president from hostile attacks, the government told the appeals court. Those security features include “specially and specifically designed Military grade ventilation, and much more,” and they “dictate the entire project,” the motion says.

“Time is of the essence!” the Justice Department lawyers wrote in their motion, which included several exclamation points in a format that’s unusual for the department’s appellate briefs.

The East Wing was demolished in October, and the administration planned to start above-ground construction as soon as this month.

Attorneys for the National Trust had argued in court filings at the appeals court that the lack of a ballroom is not a national security emergency, noting that Trump has continued to reside at the White House and host guests during construction.

“Defendants voluntarily chose to create these conditions and planned to maintain them for years on end. Only when someone stopped their illegal ballroom did the previously acceptable status quo become a supposed ‘national security’ crisis overnight,” they wrote.

Judges Patricia Millett, an Obama appointee, and Bradley Garcia, a Biden appointee, also sat on the panel.

The case is National Trust for Historic Preservation v. NPS, D.C. Cir., No. 26-05101.