Divided Supreme Court lets Trump's White House ballroom construction continue

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Aug. 31 cleared the way for President Donald Trump to continue construction on his $400 million White House ballroom, a major win for Trump's controversial effort to make over Washington landmarks.

Acting on an emergency appeal from the administration, the court ruled 5-4 that a federal judge wrongly paused the project until a legal fight could be resolved.

In an unsigned opinion, a majority of the justices said the administration is likely to win its argument that the group suing to stop construction cannot show its been sufficiently harmed. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority.

Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court's three liberal justices in dissent, calling the construction "likely unlawful" and the potential harms real.

"The White House is an iconic American building whose symbolism and history are wrapped up in its architecture," Roberts wrote.

## Group argued construction could be irreversible

The National Trust for Historic Preservation, which is challenging the ballroom, had told the justices that the project would likely become irreversible unless it is stopped now.

The Justice Department said in its appeal that the construction, which includes an underground security complex, is 65% complete and has "passed the point where major changes" to the design are feasible.

A federal district judge ruled this spring that only underground work on bomb shelters and other security-related components could move forward for now unless the president gets approval from Congress.

A divided federal appeals court backed that decision in early August but kept the order from going into immediate effective to give the administration time to appeal.

On Aug. 21, Roberts extended the pause on the order to give the justices more time to consider the appeal.

## Dispute over who can sue

The project began last October when Trump bulldozed the East Wing to begin construction of a 90,000-square-foot ballroom paid for by private funds.

The administration argued that congressional approval was not needed and that the National Trust for Historic Preservation couldn't challenge the ballroom based on a trust member's "subjective preference" about how the White House should look.

A majority of the justices said they did not need to decide if the project is legal because they agreed with the administration that the trust member hadn't shown her disagreement with the project entitled her to sue.

"This Court has not found standing in circumstances like these before," a majority said in the unsigned opinion. "Perhaps nearly any government action or project offends someone's sensibilities."

In his dissent, Roberts said the court had, in fact, previously ruled that "mere esthetic interests" can be a legitimate basis to file a lawsuit.

By failing to appreciate that, he continued, the court's majority is allowing the administration to proceed with a project that probably infringes on Congress' ability to control federal spending and to regulate federal property.

"Today's decision is no victory for the separation of powers," he wrote.

## Trump praises decision

Trump praised the decision on social media, calling the suit against the project "baseless."

"I am pleased to report that the United States Supreme Court has just ruled in favor of the Ballroom/Military Complex being built without any further contingency, doubt, or threat," he said.

Brent Leggs, head of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, urged the court to take a deeper look the lawsuit through a full set of written and oral briefings after the justices return from their summer break.

"We are pleased with Chief Justice Robert's strong dissent, which reiterated what we have maintained from the start of our case - that construction of the White House ballroom is unlawful," Leggs said in a statement.

## Trump emphasized security concerns

The administration had heavily emphasized security concerns, including Trump's reference to the structure as a "military center."

"The Project is critical for ensuring that the White House can serve as a secure location for the gathering of the President, gathering of senior government officials, and gatherings that further the interests of the United States," Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton told the Supreme Court in the appeal.

Because the materials being used are meant to withstand even nuclear blasts, there would be no way to take down or even alter the building if courts issued such an order at the end of the legal battle, according to the Justice Department.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation told the Supreme Court that the administration's "striking admission" that the project is "on the brink of a fait accompli" was exactly why construction needed to be stopped to prevent the administration from outrunning the courts.

In its Aug. 7 ruling to pause construction, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit had said the administration's national security arguments "are not an automatic get-out-of-law-free card."

"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 majority wrote. The opinion referred to the White House as "the People's House."

Circuit Judge Neomi Rao disagreed, writing in her dissent that the district court judge had improperly seized control of construction in his March ruling.

"The government should not be forced to rely on the district court's architectural approval to secure the President's home and office," Rao wrote.

Rao was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by Trump. The two judges who upheld the district judge's ruling - Patricia Millett and Brad Garcia - were appointed by Democratic presidents.

Trump, whose background is in real estate, has made several changes in the White House, including replacing the Rose Garden lawn with a paved patio and gilding the Oval Office.

For years, Trump has been pushing for a ballroom in the White House that would accommodate large gatherings, such as state dinners. He has lamented the fact that many of the fancy affairs in the past were held in tents.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation has argued that the project's size would "overwhelm the White House itself."

The administration has said construction is expected to be finished a few months before the end of Trump's term.