In a sharply worded opinion, the United States Appeals Court for the District of Columbia has upheld an injunction against the construction of President Donald Trump’s proposed White House ballroom. The court’s decision underscores the fundamental requirement for congressional authorization before significant modifications can be made to the executive residence.
The appeals court voted on Friday by a margin of two to one, with judges Patricia Millett and Bradley Garcia forming the majority. The third judge on the panel, Neomi Rao, dissented from the ruling. The majority opinion began with a reflection on the White House’s role as the “people’s house,” emphasizing that the structure is a national asset rather than a private estate.
“The President has no — and claims no — constitutionally assigned authority over that property, which is designed and maintained for the use of all Presidents, current and future, and for the American people,” Garcia and Millett wrote in their joint opinion. They argued that the executive branch cannot bypass the legislative process when undertaking major physical alterations to federal property.
The judges also addressed the events leading to the October demolition of the century-old East Wing, which was flattened to clear space for the new project. “We are aware of no instance in American history in which a President, unilaterally and using privately collected funds, demolished substantial portions of the White House,” the court noted, highlighting the unprecedented nature of the administration’s actions.
Allowing the ballroom construction to proceed would cause “permanent and irreversible harm” to the “historic, architectural, and aesthetic interests” represented by the plaintiffs, according to the ruling. Millett and Garcia, who were appointed by Democratic presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden respectively, upheld the lower court’s decision to pause construction while the broader litigation continues.
“The Defendants have not shown that Congress delegated that authority to either the President or the National Park Service,” the judges wrote. They concluded that “whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help.”
The court’s injunction includes a 14-day stay on its implementation, providing the Trump administration a window to seek relief from the Supreme Court. On his social media platform Truth Social, President Trump quickly responded to the ruling, confirming his intent to challenge the decision. “We will be immediately appealing to the United States Supreme Court,” Trump wrote at one point in his lengthy, 487-word post.
The history of the project dates back to 2011, when Trump, then known primarily as a real estate magnate, told ABC News of his ambitions to build an opulent White House ballroom to host state dinners. He had emerged at the time as a vocal critic of then-President Obama, and he renewed his pitch to build a White House ballroom during his first successful presidential bid in 2016.
While the proposal languished during his first term, the project gained momentum after he was sworn in for a second term in 2025. Trump quickly resumed his push for the ballroom, alongside other infrastructure projects designed to reshape the Washington, DC, landscape, arguing that the space was necessary for national security and secure event hosting.
In her dissent, Judge Neomi Rao criticized the majority’s intervention. “This was a blatant abuse of discretion,” Rao said, reflecting on the district court’s initial decision. She argued that the National Trust lacked standing and suggested that the lower court had allowed “aesthetic displeasure” to outweigh the government’s stated security interests. “Because the injunction is beyond the proper province of the federal courts, construction should be allowed to continue,” she wrote.
Despite the ruling, the majority suggested that the project might still proceed if the administration secures the proper legal path. “This ruling does not even necessarily mean that the Defendants may not ultimately construct the ballroom,” Garcia and Millett clarified. “What it does mean is that the Defendants may not do so during the district court’s expeditious litigation without securing Congress’s authorization, as the Constitution and laws require.”
The administration continues to maintain that the ballroom is a vital addition to the White House complex. Critics, however, have denounced the project as an unnecessary and destructive vanity project undertaken without following the correct legal protocol, setting the stage for a high-stakes legal battle at the Supreme Court.
When Trump publicly discussed the ballroom proposal in July 2025, he pledged its construction would not be destructive.
It will be near it, but not touching it, and pays total respect to the existing building,” he said at the time.
But last October, without advance notice, construction crews began levelling the East Wing, which was first built in 1902.
Congress, the judges explained, wields control over the building and its surrounding property, and the president is only a temporary tenant.
“The Military and Secret Service are viewing this horrendous, politically motivated, and unlawful ruling as a National Security threat to our Nation in that the entire Complex is being built for the protection of our Country and, additionally, all future Presidents.”
“It won’t interfere with the current building.
The nonprofit National Trust for Historic Preservation was among the groups that expressed outrage at the sudden demolition.
Plans also emerged showing that the ballroom would be approximately 90,000 square feet, or roughly 8,361 square metres, a size that would dwarf the main structure of the White House.
On March 31, US District Court Judge Richard Leon, an appointee of Republican President George W Bush, sided with the National Trust and issued an initial injunction to pause the construction.
“Unless and until Congress blesses this project through statutory authorization, construction has to stop,” Leon wrote at the time.
“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,” the trust’s president, Brent Leggs, said.
In recent months, they have suggested the structure would be six storeys deep, with bomb shelters, an underground military hospital, secret military facilities and drone-related protective materials on the roof.
