Construction continues on the new helipad on the South Lawn and East Wing Ballroom of the White House on August 10, 2026 in Washington, DC.
Andrew Harnik | Getty Images
In a divided decision, the Supreme Court on Monday allowed President Donald Trump to continue construction on the controversial White House ballroom as legal challenges to the project unfold.
The court’s five-judge majority said the plaintiffs challenging the National Trust for Historic Preservation’s Ballroom likely lack legal standing to sue to block the nearly $400 million project.
The order, which was not signed by the majority, does not address whether President Trump has the legal authority to build the banquet hall without Congressional approval, leaving an open question as the trust’s litigation continues.
The order said a declaration by trust member Alison Hoagland that she would be “injured” if she had to see the completed ballroom on her regular visits to the neighborhood was likely not sufficient basis for a stand-up.
“Mere aggression, disagreement, or hatred does not constitute a specific and special injury under Article III of the United States Constitution,” the order said. “Perhaps almost every government action or project offends someone’s sensibilities.”
Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s three liberal members opposed the order.
“The President has ordered the East Wing of the White House to be demolished to make way for a new privately funded state banquet hall to be built in its place,” the opponents said. “Ballroom construction has been progressing rapidly for the better part of a year.”
“That construction is probably illegal.”
Last week, Roberts temporarily blocked a federal district court judge’s order blocking the banquet hall from being built pending the National Trust’s lawsuit, which a federal appeals court upheld.
The Chief Justice’s action gives the Supreme Court sufficient time to consider whether a longer trial is necessary as the case progresses.
In his dissenting opinion Monday, Roberts wrote that Congress explicitly prohibits building on federal land without Congress’s “express authority.”
“The Ballroom is a building or structure under construction in Presidents Park, a federal park site in the District of Columbia,” Roberts wrote. “But Congress has yet to pass any law resembling ‘express authority’ for the executive branch to enact law.”
The Chief Justice also noted the majority’s finding that Mr. Hoagland was unlikely to have legal standing to object to the construction of the banquet hall.
“The White House is an iconic American building, and its symbolism and history are embedded in its architecture,” Roberts wrote.
“Historic preservationists like Hoagland can be aesthetically damaged in specific and specific ways by the alterations to historic buildings that they so often enjoy,” he wrote.
