Heavy machinery tears down a section of the East Wing of the White House as construction begins on President Donald Trump's planned ballroom, in Washington, DC, on October 21, 2025.
Split Supreme Court Allows Trump Ballroom Construction That Chief Justice Calls 'Likely Unlawful'
"The White House belongs to the people, but Trump consistently acts like it belongs to him alone," said one watchdog, calling out the court's majority for allowing construction on "this illegal project."
US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts recently let construction on President Donald Trump's White House ballroom continue in a temporary solo decision, but on Monday he sided with the three liberals against the five right-wingers who allowed the project to proceed during a legal battle.
The Trump administration sought intervention from the nation's top court after the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld a district judge's ruling that halted above-ground construction but permitted work on an underground bunker and other "national security facilities." Roberts then paused the appellate decision but also sought a review from all justices.
The five justices behind the majority's Monday decision, including Trump's three appointees, concluded the administration "is likely to prevail" in showing that the National Trust for Historic Preservation—which is challenging parts of the widely contested project that's already destroyed the East Wing of the White House—lacks standing.
"This court has not found standing in circumstances like these before. To the contrary, we have repeatedly held that mere offense, disagreement, or distaste does not qualify as a concrete and particularized injury under Article III," the majority wrote, referring to the portion of the US Constitution that addresses the judicial system.
"The government has also established that it will likely suffer irreparable harm from the district court's injunction and that the balance of the equities tips in its favor," the majority added in its unsigned order, which signaled that the merits of the case should continue to be examined by lower courts.
Meanwhile, writing for himself and the liberal justices, Roberts said that the construction "is likely unlawful," given that Congress has not passed legislation authorizing the project, and pointed to the trust's executive committee member Alison K. Hoagland.
"As a Capitol Hill resident, Hoagland regularly visits the White House to take in the historic building's beauty and to appreciate its symbolism. By overshadowing the traditional White House, Hoagland explains, the new ballroom will detract from the building's
message of republican simplicity and thereby worsen her viewing experience," he wrote. "Hoagland's injury suffices for standing."
The high court's majority "misconceives the plaintiff's injury, allowing the executive's likely infringement of the legislature's power of the purse and authority to regulate federal property in the District of Columbia to continue," Roberts added. "Today's decision is no victory for the separation of powers."
The president cheered the majority's decision, writing on his Truth Social platform:
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. We are living in the Golden Age of America, and this Building will be one of the Greatest ever constructed in Washington, D.C. When completed in the Summer of 2028, the magnificent Ballroom and Military Complex will be something that the entire Country is very proud of. The Project, despite the baseless lawsuit brought by the so-called National Trust for Historic Preservation of the United States, which is not in any way affiliated with the United States Government, is under budget and ahead of schedule. The Ballroom is totally funded by Great Patriots and Corporations and, therefore, is a Gift — At no cost to the American Taxpayer.
Critics continued to condemn the project after the decision, with US Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) stressing on Bluesky that "the president's vanity project does nothing to benefit anyone but Donald J. Trump himself."
"Not a penny to lower your costs," the senator reminded Americans. "This has been a ridiculous waste of taxpayer dollars from the start."
Jon Golinger, democracy advocate at the watchdog group Public Citizen, said in a statement that "in light of this disappointing decision by the court, the next Congress must make investigating Trump's illegal ballroom project and everyone involved with funding and facilitating it a top priority."
Both chambers of Congress are narrowly controlled by Trump's Republican Party, and some GOP lawmakers even tried to boost the project. However, Democrats are aiming to reclaim majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives in the November midterm elections—and if they succeed, they could probe the ballroom and various other concerns from his second presidency.
"Trump suffers from a crippling case of 'palace-envy' and who knows what national treasure he'll demolish next to try to build himself another gold-plated monument," warned Golinger. "For now, we will keep digging into and exposing Trump's ballroom funding schemes, through which he raked in millions from corporations with billions in government contracts and anonymous donors with unknown agendas."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts recently let construction on President Donald Trump's White House ballroom continue in a temporary solo decision, but on Monday he sided with the three liberals against the five right-wingers who allowed the project to proceed during a legal battle.
The Trump administration sought intervention from the nation's top court after the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld a district judge's ruling that halted above-ground construction but permitted work on an underground bunker and other "national security facilities." Roberts then paused the appellate decision but also sought a review from all justices.
The five justices behind the majority's Monday decision, including Trump's three appointees, concluded the administration "is likely to prevail" in showing that the National Trust for Historic Preservation—which is challenging parts of the widely contested project that's already destroyed the East Wing of the White House—lacks standing.
"This court has not found standing in circumstances like these before. To the contrary, we have repeatedly held that mere offense, disagreement, or distaste does not qualify as a concrete and particularized injury under Article III," the majority wrote, referring to the portion of the US Constitution that addresses the judicial system.
"The government has also established that it will likely suffer irreparable harm from the district court's injunction and that the balance of the equities tips in its favor," the majority added in its unsigned order, which signaled that the merits of the case should continue to be examined by lower courts.
Meanwhile, writing for himself and the liberal justices, Roberts said that the construction "is likely unlawful," given that Congress has not passed legislation authorizing the project, and pointed to the trust's executive committee member Alison K. Hoagland.
"As a Capitol Hill resident, Hoagland regularly visits the White House to take in the historic building's beauty and to appreciate its symbolism. By overshadowing the traditional White House, Hoagland explains, the new ballroom will detract from the building's
message of republican simplicity and thereby worsen her viewing experience," he wrote. "Hoagland's injury suffices for standing."
The high court's majority "misconceives the plaintiff's injury, allowing the executive's likely infringement of the legislature's power of the purse and authority to regulate federal property in the District of Columbia to continue," Roberts added. "Today's decision is no victory for the separation of powers."
The president cheered the majority's decision, writing on his Truth Social platform:
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. We are living in the Golden Age of America, and this Building will be one of the Greatest ever constructed in Washington, D.C. When completed in the Summer of 2028, the magnificent Ballroom and Military Complex will be something that the entire Country is very proud of. The Project, despite the baseless lawsuit brought by the so-called National Trust for Historic Preservation of the United States, which is not in any way affiliated with the United States Government, is under budget and ahead of schedule. The Ballroom is totally funded by Great Patriots and Corporations and, therefore, is a Gift — At no cost to the American Taxpayer.
Critics continued to condemn the project after the decision, with US Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) stressing on Bluesky that "the president's vanity project does nothing to benefit anyone but Donald J. Trump himself."
"Not a penny to lower your costs," the senator reminded Americans. "This has been a ridiculous waste of taxpayer dollars from the start."
Jon Golinger, democracy advocate at the watchdog group Public Citizen, said in a statement that "in light of this disappointing decision by the court, the next Congress must make investigating Trump's illegal ballroom project and everyone involved with funding and facilitating it a top priority."
Both chambers of Congress are narrowly controlled by Trump's Republican Party, and some GOP lawmakers even tried to boost the project. However, Democrats are aiming to reclaim majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives in the November midterm elections—and if they succeed, they could probe the ballroom and various other concerns from his second presidency.
"Trump suffers from a crippling case of 'palace-envy' and who knows what national treasure he'll demolish next to try to build himself another gold-plated monument," warned Golinger. "For now, we will keep digging into and exposing Trump's ballroom funding schemes, through which he raked in millions from corporations with billions in government contracts and anonymous donors with unknown agendas."
- Trump Lashes Out After Judge Blocks Construction of His White House Ballroom ›
- Supreme Court Lets Trump Ballroom Construction Continue—For Now ›
- Democrats, Legal Groups Urge Supreme Court to Block Trump Ballroom Without Congressional OK ›
- 'Each President Is a Temporary Tenant': DC Appeals Court Orders Halt to Trump Ballroom Construction ›
US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts recently let construction on President Donald Trump's White House ballroom continue in a temporary solo decision, but on Monday he sided with the three liberals against the five right-wingers who allowed the project to proceed during a legal battle.
The Trump administration sought intervention from the nation's top court after the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld a district judge's ruling that halted above-ground construction but permitted work on an underground bunker and other "national security facilities." Roberts then paused the appellate decision but also sought a review from all justices.
The five justices behind the majority's Monday decision, including Trump's three appointees, concluded the administration "is likely to prevail" in showing that the National Trust for Historic Preservation—which is challenging parts of the widely contested project that's already destroyed the East Wing of the White House—lacks standing.
"This court has not found standing in circumstances like these before. To the contrary, we have repeatedly held that mere offense, disagreement, or distaste does not qualify as a concrete and particularized injury under Article III," the majority wrote, referring to the portion of the US Constitution that addresses the judicial system.
"The government has also established that it will likely suffer irreparable harm from the district court's injunction and that the balance of the equities tips in its favor," the majority added in its unsigned order, which signaled that the merits of the case should continue to be examined by lower courts.
Meanwhile, writing for himself and the liberal justices, Roberts said that the construction "is likely unlawful," given that Congress has not passed legislation authorizing the project, and pointed to the trust's executive committee member Alison K. Hoagland.
"As a Capitol Hill resident, Hoagland regularly visits the White House to take in the historic building's beauty and to appreciate its symbolism. By overshadowing the traditional White House, Hoagland explains, the new ballroom will detract from the building's
message of republican simplicity and thereby worsen her viewing experience," he wrote. "Hoagland's injury suffices for standing."
The high court's majority "misconceives the plaintiff's injury, allowing the executive's likely infringement of the legislature's power of the purse and authority to regulate federal property in the District of Columbia to continue," Roberts added. "Today's decision is no victory for the separation of powers."
The president cheered the majority's decision, writing on his Truth Social platform:
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. We are living in the Golden Age of America, and this Building will be one of the Greatest ever constructed in Washington, D.C. When completed in the Summer of 2028, the magnificent Ballroom and Military Complex will be something that the entire Country is very proud of. The Project, despite the baseless lawsuit brought by the so-called National Trust for Historic Preservation of the United States, which is not in any way affiliated with the United States Government, is under budget and ahead of schedule. The Ballroom is totally funded by Great Patriots and Corporations and, therefore, is a Gift — At no cost to the American Taxpayer.
Critics continued to condemn the project after the decision, with US Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) stressing on Bluesky that "the president's vanity project does nothing to benefit anyone but Donald J. Trump himself."
"Not a penny to lower your costs," the senator reminded Americans. "This has been a ridiculous waste of taxpayer dollars from the start."
Jon Golinger, democracy advocate at the watchdog group Public Citizen, said in a statement that "in light of this disappointing decision by the court, the next Congress must make investigating Trump's illegal ballroom project and everyone involved with funding and facilitating it a top priority."
Both chambers of Congress are narrowly controlled by Trump's Republican Party, and some GOP lawmakers even tried to boost the project. However, Democrats are aiming to reclaim majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives in the November midterm elections—and if they succeed, they could probe the ballroom and various other concerns from his second presidency.
"Trump suffers from a crippling case of 'palace-envy' and who knows what national treasure he'll demolish next to try to build himself another gold-plated monument," warned Golinger. "For now, we will keep digging into and exposing Trump's ballroom funding schemes, through which he raked in millions from corporations with billions in government contracts and anonymous donors with unknown agendas."
- Trump Lashes Out After Judge Blocks Construction of His White House Ballroom ›
- Supreme Court Lets Trump Ballroom Construction Continue—For Now ›
- Democrats, Legal Groups Urge Supreme Court to Block Trump Ballroom Without Congressional OK ›
- 'Each President Is a Temporary Tenant': DC Appeals Court Orders Halt to Trump Ballroom Construction ›