All articles tagged with #national trust for historic preservation
The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to allow construction of President Trump’s White House ballroom to continue, blocking a lower court injunction. The majority found the National Trust for Historic Preservation lacked standing to sue, while Chief Justice Roberts dissented, calling the project likely unlawful. Construction is reportedly 65% complete and expected to finish by November 2026.
The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to allow construction of a $600 million White House ballroom to continue, finding that the National Trust for Historic Preservation and its member Alison Hoagland lacked standing to sue. Chief Justice John Roberts dissented, calling the project 'likely unlawful' and citing Winston Churchill to argue that buildings shape democratic character. The decision did not address the project's legality, leaving the question of whether Congress must approve the construction unresolved.
The US Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that construction of a $400 million White House ballroom can proceed, blocking lower court injunctions. The majority ruled the National Trust for Historic Preservation lacked standing, while Chief Justice John Roberts dissented, calling the project likely unlawful.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to allow construction of a new White House ballroom to proceed, blocking lower court injunctions. The majority did not rule on the project's legality, instead finding the National Trust for Historic Preservation likely lacks standing to sue. Chief Justice John Roberts dissented, calling the construction 'likely unlawful' due to lack of congressional approval. The project, estimated at $600 million, is expected to be fully completed by August 2028.
The Supreme Court issued a 5-4 ruling allowing construction of the White House ballroom to continue, citing a lack of legal standing for the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Chief Justice John Roberts dissented, stating the project is 'likely unlawful.' The decision permits the largest expansion to the executive mansion in decades to proceed without a final ruling on its legality.
The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to allow President Trump to continue construction of a new White House ballroom, blocking a challenge from the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The court found the trust likely lacks legal standing but did not rule on the project's legality. Construction is 65% complete, with a 250-person crew working around the clock.
The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to allow the $400 million White House ballroom project to finish, arguing that completing it is a national security imperative and that delay would pose unacceptable risks. A lower court has halted the above-ground portion during ongoing litigation with the National Trust for Historic Preservation, with the project now about 65% complete and underground work allowed to continue. The National Trust warns the project could become irreversible if not stopped, while the administration contends congressional action isn’t needed and opponents allege the plan could overwhelm the White House.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation and Democrats asked the Supreme Court to halt construction of the White House ballroom while litigation plays out, arguing the administration bypassed Congress by seeking private donations instead of authorization. A divided appeals court ordered a halt by Friday unless Congress acts; the White House says the project is needed for security and is about 65% complete, with substantial progress expected by November 2026.
A D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals stayed a lower-court order halting construction on Trump’s White House ballroom, allowing work to continue at least until April 17 while the district court reconsiders safety and security concerns; the panel left open the option for further appeals, as the National Trust for Historic Preservation sues to stop the project and the administration argues pausing poses national security risks.
A federal judge ruled that the White House East Wing renovation can continue for now, finding the National Trust for Historic Preservation’s challenge insufficient to show the President lacked authority or that Congressional authorization was required or that federal agency action was involved. The judge noted the trust could amend its complaint to test statutory authority, and emphasized the executive residence is likely not an agency under the Administrative Procedures Act.