The lawsuit names President Trump, the National Park Service, the Department of the Interior, the General Services Administration, and their respective leaders as defendants. It argues that the administration bypassed the National Capital Planning Act by failing to submit plans to the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) before demolition and construction began, violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by not conducting an adequate environmental review, and overstepped constitutional bounds under the Property Clause by not obtaining congressional approval for alterations to federal property.
"No president is legally allowed to tear down portions of the White House without any review whatsoever—not President Trump, not President Biden, and not anyone else," the complaint states. It further asserts: "And no president is legally allowed to construct a ballroom on public property without giving the public the opportunity to weigh in. President Trump’s efforts to do so should be immediately halted, and work on the Ballroom Project should be paused until the Defendants complete the required reviews."
Carol Quillen, president and CEO of the National Trust, emphasized the symbolic importance of the White House in a statement accompanying the filing: “The White House is arguably the most evocative building in our country and a globally recognized symbol of our powerful American ideals. As the organization charged with protecting places where our history happened, the National Trust was compelled to file this case.” She added that submitting the project to the NCPC for review "protects the iconic historic features of the White House campus as it evolves" and that inviting public comments "signals respect and helps ensure a lasting legacy that befits a government of the people, by the people, for the people."
The project, announced by the White House in July 2025, involves constructing a 90,000-square-foot ballroom on the site of the East Wing, which was built in 1902 and significantly altered in 1942. Initially estimated at $200 million with a capacity for 650 guests, the plans have expanded to a $300 million facility capable of hosting up to 1,350 people, funded primarily through private donations. Demolition of the East Wing began in October 2025 and was completed shortly thereafter, despite objections from preservationists who had urged a pause for reviews.
The National Trust had previously sent a letter in October 2025 to relevant agencies, including the NCPC, the Commission of Fine Arts, and the National Park Service, calling for a halt to demolition until proper procedures were followed, but received no response. The lawsuit represents the most significant legal challenge to date against the project, which has drawn criticism from architectural experts, former first ladies, and public opinion polls showing opposition.
White House spokesperson Davis Ingle defended the project, stating: "President Trump has full legal authority to modernize, renovate, and beautify the White House – just like all of his predecessors did." The administration has maintained that the White House is exempt from certain preservation laws, such as the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and that NCPC jurisdiction applies only to new construction, not demolition or site preparation. Officials have indicated that ballroom plans will be submitted to the NCPC later in December 2025.
The NCPC, chaired by Will Scharf—a Trump appointee who also serves as White House staff secretary—has previously clarified that its oversight covers construction but not demolition. This interpretation allowed the East Wing to be razed without prior commission review, a move critics argue circumvented standard processes followed in past White House modifications, such as the construction of a tennis pavilion during Trump's first term.
Construction activity has continued unabated, with reports of heavy machinery, cranes, and nighttime work on the site as recently as early December 2025. The ballroom is intended to address long-standing limitations in hosting large events at the White House, where the East Room and State Dining Room accommodate far fewer guests, often requiring temporary tents on the South Lawn.
Preservationists contend that the scale of the addition—nearly double the size of the main White House residence—risks overwhelming the historic complex's classical design and balanced proportions. The lawsuit seeks a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to freeze work until all mandated reviews are completed, including public comment periods.
This legal action follows earlier, unsuccessful attempts to intervene, such as an emergency motion dismissed in October 2025. Public polls, including one cited in coverage, indicate significant opposition, with 56% of Americans against demolishing the East Wing for the ballroom.
The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, who scheduled a hearing on the motion for injunctive relief. As the lawsuit proceeds, it highlights ongoing tensions between executive authority over the White House and statutory requirements for transparency and oversight in federal development projects.
The project traces its roots to Trump's long-expressed desire for a grand event space, inspired in part by facilities at his private properties. While predecessors have made additions—like the Truman Balcony in 1948 or various renovations—the scale and speed of this initiative, combined with the complete removal of a historic wing, mark it as unprecedented in modern times.
