Appeals Court Halts Construction of White House Ballroom Pending Congressional Approval

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a two‑week stay on Friday, preventing the Trump administration from continuing above‑ground work on a new ballroom at the White House. The panel, sitting as three judges, affirmed a district‑court injunction that bars construction of the $400 million facility until Congress authorises funding.

Legal background

The dispute began when historic preservationists sued in December 2025, a week after the demolition of the East Wing was completed. They argued that the president lacks unilateral authority to approve major structural changes to the executive residence. The appeals court ruled 2‑1 in their favour, with Judges Patricia Millett and Bradley Garcia forming the majority and Judge Neomi Rao dissenting.

The court wrote, "Whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help," underscoring a long‑standing constitutional principle that large‑scale alterations to the White House require legislative sanction.

District court order

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, appointed by George W. Bush, had already ordered a halt to above‑ground work on 16 April, while allowing underground security installations to continue. He later remarked, "Defendants argue that the entire ballroom construction project, from tip to tail, falls within the safety-and-security exception," and rejected that interpretation as unreasonable.

Leon stressed that the White House remains free to build underground bunkers, hospitals and other defensive facilities, but the ballroom itself cannot proceed without congressional appropriation.

Government’s security argument rejected

Administration lawyers contended that the ballroom was integral to a suite of security upgrades, including bomb shelters, a medical centre, and defences against drones, ballistic missiles and biohazards. The appellate judges dismissed the claim, finding that the security rationale did not justify bypassing the constitutional requirement for legislative approval.

Political reaction

President Trump responded on social media, calling the decision “unjust” and citing Judge Rao’s dissent. He described the proposed ballroom as a "Great Gift to America" and asserted that the military and Secret Service view the ruling as a national‑security threat.

The National Capital Planning Commission had granted final approval on 2 April, but the court noted that such planning consent does not replace the need for congressional funding. The National Trust for Historic Preservation argued that the lack of a ballroom does not constitute a national‑security emergency.

Next steps

With the two‑week stay in place, the administration must choose whether to seek emergency relief from the Supreme Court or to return to Congress for the necessary appropriation. Either path could delay the project indefinitely.

First reported by the original wire report.