Trump White House ballroom project sparks legal battle, Supreme Court faces stoppage ruling

The fate of the ballroom hangs in court as President Trump races against time.

He has recruited a team of 250 workers to advance construction 20 hours a day, seven days a week, to complete as much work as possible as quickly as possible. The government said in a court filing that it plans to install 450 tons of steel bars and pour 2,300 cubic meters of concrete this week, with the project now two-thirds complete.

Now, the case is pending before the Supreme Court, and the Trump administration has made a realistic appeal to the justices: the banquet hall project has progressed to this point and can no longer be stopped.

“His strategy is clearly to change reality so that, rather than maintaining the status quo, those who legally object to his actions have to overturn a fait accompli,” said Lawrence H. Tribe, professor emeritus of constitutional law at Harvard University.

For years, Trump has argued that the White House should have its own ballroom, saying it was about prestige on the world stage. Having the banquet hall will allow officials to host large events for important guests without having to pitch a tent on the South Lawn, he said.

In recent months, as preservationists and other critics have sought to halt or at least slow down the project, Trump has advanced a new rationale: national security. Simply put, he has considered the banquet hall and the military bunker below it to be one.

The bunker — formally known as the Presidential Emergency Operations Center — was built during World War II beneath what was once the East Wing, which Trump demolished last year to make way for a ballroom.

Today, he always talks about the two projects in the same breath.

For example, after a man with a gun stormed the White House Correspondents' Association dinner in April this year, Trump said on social media that the chaos proved that "the top-secret military banquet hall currently under construction in the White House" was indeed necessary.

Trump did not seek any approvals when he demolished the East Wing last October and did not submit construction or demolition plans to Congress. Although he submitted the project to two review panels he appointed to oversee the project, Trump continually changed the authorized design.

Several federal courts have ruled that the president exceeded his authority by moving forward without congressional approval, but those rulings have been suspended pending appeals — meaning construction can continue at least until Friday, when an appeals court order halting above-ground work takes effect.

The case is also pending before the Supreme Court.

Last week, the Trump administration told the Supreme Court that the president was adding an ornate gilded emblem to the exterior of the ballroom, a design element that was never submitted to the Fine Arts Commission.

White House Director of Management and Administration Joshua Fisher told the court that a concrete and steel superstructure has been built, which is five stories deep and more than 20 meters high.

Fisher said 80 percent of the project's steel bars have been laid and concrete has been poured.

He said $335 million of the $400 million needed for the project has come from private donors. He estimates that the project is 65% complete.

Fisher said the ballroom's columns are being carved by famous Italian artists and that the building will be strong enough to withstand a nuclear blast.

"Given current progress, there is no turning back for this main structure," Fisher wrote. He added that even if the Supreme Court ordered modification of the building plans or demolition of the building, "it will not be possible".

The message is clear: The ballroom is irreversible.

But in a filing on Tuesday, conservationists questioning the project told the justices that the government was trying to "override judicial review" by suggesting it was "too late to halt it."

"They told this court that because the banquet hall was made of the type of concrete 'used in nuclear power plants,' it would soon be 'nearly impossible to demolish,'" the filing reads.

Lawyers for the National Trust for Historic Preservation, a nonprofit organization chartered by Congress to preserve America’s historic buildings, said the government deliberately accelerated construction “in an attempt to keep its illegal banquet hall” beyond the reach of judicial intervention.

Citing the Constitution and several federal laws, they noted that such projects must be approved by Congress. One of the federal laws states: "No building or structure shall be erected on any reservation, park, or public land of the Commonwealth of the District of Columbia without the express authorization of Congress."

Lower court judges have sided with the preservationists, ruling that White House expansion and renovations must first receive congressional approval.

"An attempt to thwart judicial review and usurp Congress's exclusive authority should not be rewarded with a stay of execution, allowing the appellants to complete a banquet they had no authority to start," said a team of trust fund attorneys led by Thaddeus A. Hall.

The trust recommended in Tuesday's filing that the Supreme Court temporarily halt above-ground construction and quickly schedule oral arguments for October or November to formally decide whether the project can continue. The trust said if the Lord Chancellor did not press the pause button now, it would be too late by which time the project would be largely completed by this autumn.

Deputy Attorney General D. John Saul argued that the ballroom was inseparable from the broader national security needs of the White House complex. The structure is built with hardened concrete, steel and rebar; has missile-resistant columns, roof and beams; drone-proof ceiling and roof; and bullet-, shrapnel- and explosion-proof glass, he said. It includes bomb shelters, state-of-the-art hospitals and medical facilities, protective partitions between all areas of the building, top-secret military structures and equipment, military-grade ventilation systems, an integrated HVAC system, sniper positions and rooftop drone landing pads.

Saul also disputed the assertion in the appeals court's adverse ruling that Trump was a temporary tenant of the White House, not its owner. “The President of the United States of America is not a tenant but the sole elected head of the executive branch,” he wrote, adding that other presidents have taken steps to renovate the White House.

The court's conservative majority has generally been receptive to the Trump administration's moves to expand presidential power, but it has also ruled against some of Trump's signature initiatives. The justices are expected to issue an order before the Court of Appeal's construction halt order takes effect on Friday.

Kimberly Weiler, a law professor at the University of Baltimore, said Trump's attempt to build a massive new building on the White House grounds without approval from lawmakers is his latest move in a years-long push to expand presidential powers.