Federal Judge Halts Proposed Privately Funded White House Ballroom in East Wing
A federal judge in Washington, D.C., has ordered a pause on plans for a new 650-person ballroom on White House grounds, ruling that the project cannot move forward without explicit authorization from Congress — even if it is financed through private donations.
In a 35-page preliminary injunction issued March 31, U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon framed the dispute in constitutional terms: whether a sitting president can undertake a major construction project at the White House using private funds without first securing legislative approval. The injunction follows a lawsuit filed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation last December and re-filed in early March after the court advised the organization to amend its complaint.
Judge Leon concluded that the National Trust is likely to prevail on its central claim that the administration’s actions are “ultra vires,” meaning beyond the legal powers granted by statute. “The President must identify some law that allows him to demolish the East Wing and construct his planned ballroom with private funds,” Leon wrote, adding that “no law comes close to giving the President this authority.”
The proposed ballroom, planned for the White House East Wing, carries a projected overall budget of $400 million. President Donald Trump has said the project would be paid for by private donors rather than federal taxpayers. Leon’s order, however, emphasized that the source of the money does not eliminate the need for legal authority. He pointed to a “gaping chasm” between existing appropriations and the ballroom’s projected cost, and wrote that the defendants had presented what he characterized as a “convoluted funding scheme” to justify using donated funds for a project of this scale.
“Without question, Defendants have never engaged in a construction project of this size and scale using donated funds,” Leon wrote.
The defendants named in the complaint include the National Park Service and its director, Jessica Bowron; John Stanwich, superintendent of the White House and the President’s Park; Douglas Burgum, the secretary of the interior; Michael Rigas, acting administrator of general services in the current administration; and Trump.
In a statement responding to the injunction, National Trust president and CEO Carol Quillen called the ruling “a win for the American people,” arguing that the project would permanently affect “one of the most beloved and iconic places in our nation.”
Leon’s decision also placed the proposed ballroom within a long history of congressional involvement in the White House’s physical evolution. He cited the Residence Act of 1790, which authorized commissioners to provide “suitable buildings” for the president, and noted that Congress has repeatedly authorized and funded construction and maintenance over more than three centuries. Among the examples referenced in the ruling: repairs after the War of 1812, appropriations for the South Portico in 1823 and the North Portico in 1829, and authorization for the East and West Wings in 1902.
Shortly after the injunction was issued, the Trump administration filed an appeal with the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Trump responded on Truth Social by attacking the National Trust, calling it “a Radical Left Group of Lunatics,” and insisting that “Congressional approval has never been given” for White House construction “big or small” in comparable circumstances. He also reiterated that the ballroom would be built with private donations, not taxpayer funds.
For now, Leon’s order freezes the project at a moment when questions of stewardship, symbolism, and legal authority converge on one of the country’s most scrutinized historic sites — and sets up a high-stakes appellate fight over who, precisely, gets to reshape the White House.
