The National Trust for Historic Preservation failed to secure a temporary injunction to stop demolition and construction of a proposed 90,000-square-foot White House ballroom, though a judge ordered the administration to file plans with federal design review bodies. The Trust is seeking a judicial declaration requiring pre-demolition procedures and has asked the court to consider whether congressional authorization is required. The project is privately financed (about $400 million); the National Park Service completed an environmental assessment in August that was recently filed in court. Key public hearings are scheduled for Jan. 8 (NCPC) and Jan. 15 (court).
Judge Lets Trump’s 90,000‑Sq.-Ft. White House Ballroom Proceed — Orders Design Filings
Demolition of the East Wing of the White House during construction of a new ballroom extension in Washington, D.C., on Dec. 9, 2025. / Credit: Aaron Schwartz / Bloomberg via Getty Images
Washington — Wrecking balls and bulldozers can sometimes outpace the courts, and that reality is at the center of a dispute between the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the White House.
The Trust last week failed to obtain a temporary injunction to halt construction of a planned 90,000-square-foot ballroom on White House grounds. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon denied the Trust's bid to stop work, allowing demolition and construction to continue while imposing limited requirements on the administration.
Trust Concerns
Carol Quillen, president and CEO of the National Trust, said the public has a right to be heard when significant changes are proposed on national landmarks:
"The American people own these places. And we, the American people, have a right to weigh in when significant changes to them are proposed."The Trust seeks a court declaration that would require pre-demolition procedures for White House construction so historic materials and features are not removed before experts and the public can review them.
White House Position
The White House argues the ballroom project is not yet far enough along to trigger review by federal design oversight bodies and maintains that the president has broad authority over construction on White House grounds. Government attorneys told the court that construction plans are not finalized. A White House official also said, "There are no plans for any demolition of any structures at this time."
Judge's Order And Filings
Although he denied the Trust's motion for a temporary injunction, Judge Leon ordered the administration to file construction plans with the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) and the Commission of Fine Arts by the end of the month — a step the White House had already indicated it planned to take. The administration maintains the NCPC's authority applies to vertical construction and not to demolition, a point in dispute in the case.
The government also filed a previously unpublished environmental assessment prepared by the National Park Service in August that outlines the project's scope, timeline and preservation measures for the 90,000-square-foot addition. The assessment only became publicly available last week through a court filing.
Congressional Authorization Question
The Trust has also asked the court to enforce a statute that could require congressional authorization for the ballroom. The law states: "A building or structure shall not be erected on any reservation, park, or public grounds of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia without express authority of Congress." The project is privately financed, estimated at roughly $400 million, and no congressional appropriation or approval resolution has been introduced.
Outlook and Next Steps
Quillen said she found a "silver lining" in the ruling because the judge's order to file plans with review bodies advances the Trust's goal of ensuring greater oversight and public input. The National Capital Planning Commission is scheduled to hear a presentation on the ballroom on Jan. 8, and another court hearing is set for Jan. 15.
Why It Matters
The dispute raises broader questions about how presidential control of the executive mansion intersects with established review processes for federal construction in Washington, D.C., and whether historic fabric can be protected when changes proceed quickly and with limited outside oversight.
