Appeals court says Trump is unlawfully constructing White House ballroom

By Devan Cole, Betsy Klein, CNN

(CNN) — A divided federal appeals court ruled Friday that President Donald Trump is unlawfully constructing a massive new ballroom at the White House, possibly teeing up a high-stakes showdown over the issue before the Supreme Court.

“Whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help,” the DC Circuit Court of Appeals said in a 2-1 ruling siding with the nation’s top historic preservation group, which sued over the project last year.

“The National Trust has shown, compellingly, that Congress has not ceded unfettered authority to the Executive Branch to dramatically redesign, reshape, and reconstruct the White House – the People’s House – to fit a particular President’s desires,” the court wrote in its unsigned opinion.

The DC Circuit, however, paused implementation of its ruling for two weeks to give Trump time to appeal to the Supreme Court.

The judges who ruled against Trump are Patricia Millett, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, and Brad Garcia, an appointee of former President Joe Biden. Judge Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee, dissented.

The majority opinion — spanning more than 100 pages — is the latest stinging judicial rebuke in the legal saga over Trump’s decision to demolish the White House’s East Wing last year to make room for the ballroom.

The ballroom case is also one of several legal challenges brought against Trump’s various pet projects around the District. Other lawsuits calling into question his renovation of the Reflecting Pool, his push to build an American version of Paris’ L’Arc de Triomphe, and his plans to turn a public golf course into private, high-end links are ongoing.

In April, a federal judge in Washington, DC, ordered Trump to stop with all above-ground construction of the ballroom until Congress blessed his plans. But the appeals court permitted him to continue with the project for now while the court considered the case. Friday’s ruling unwinds that earlier decision and makes clear that the entire project requires congressional approval.

“This is 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,” Brent Leggs, the president and CEO of the National Trust, said in a statement.

Rao said in her dissent that she thought the National Trust did not have the legal right – known as “standing” – to bring the case in the first place, agreeing with arguments pushed by Trump’s lawyers since last year.

She criticized US District Judge Richard Leon, who first ruled against the project last spring, for elevating “the aesthetic displeasure” of the group with the project over Trump’s argument that it’s needed for national security reasons.

“The district court seized supervision of construction at the White House, and my colleagues affirm this judicial overreach,” Rao wrote.

Above-grade construction on the ballroom began in the spring and has made considerable progress. Images posted by Trump earlier this week reveal multiple levels of concrete support columns and metal rebar amid a significant amount of construction equipment, including a tower crane.

The president has been personally involved in ballroom details, from floor plans to marble selection. The sprawling ballroom project has an estimated size of approximately 89,000 square feet, according to lead architect Shalom Baranes. By contrast, the primary White House structure, the Executive Mansion, is just 55,000 square feet.

Trump has maintained that the project isn’t subject to any oversight and that he should be able to continue with it without any serious scrutiny. He has said it will be complete in the summer of 2028, an expedited timeline for completion months before he leaves office.

“The Project is on cost, and substantially ahead of schedule,” Trump said in his Wednesday post.

The White House did not immediately respond to CNN’s request for comment.

As a Justice Department attorney defending the project pressed the appeals court in June to reverse Leon’s ruling, he pushed an expansive view of executive power that included an assertion that no court had authority to halt construction, even if it was deemed unlawful.

“If this were complete lawlessness by the government, it couldn’t be stopped?” Millett asked, to which the lawyer, Yaakov Roth, replied: “On these theories, I think that’s right.”

In its opinion Friday, the court said that position is flatly wrong.

“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 in the majority said.

This story has been updated with additional details.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.