A federal appeals panel late Friday granted the Trump administration permission to proceed with construction of a $400 million ballroom on the footprint of the former East Wing of the White House, temporarily suspending a lower court order that had halted work.
The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit put the preliminary injunction issued by a trial court on hold while it considers a request from the U.S. Justice Department for an extended pause on that injunction during the pendency of the appeal.
The appeals court scheduled oral argument for June 5 to address whether the construction should be stopped while the appeal is adjudicated. The panel's procedural order did not reach the substantive questions raised by the lawsuit challenging the administration's authority to build the ballroom.
Friday's action temporarily reverses a decision handed down a day earlier by U.S. District Judge Richard Leon in Washington, who had concluded the ballroom project was unlawful because it proceeded without explicit approval from the U.S. Congress.
The legal dispute stems from a suit filed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation last year. In its complaint, the National Trust argued that the president and the National Park Service lacked authority to demolish the historic East Wing to clear the site for the new ballroom. The organization brought suit in December after the administration demolished the structure.
The White House has portrayed the ballroom as a signature addition and part of an effort to reshape the capital. Officials have described the project as a modernization of infrastructure that will enhance security, and President Trump has highlighted that private donors are funding the work.
Both the National Trust and White House representatives did not provide immediate comment in response to requests made after business hours.
Legal posture and next steps
The appeals panel's stay allows construction to continue for the time being while the court evaluates the Justice Department's petition for relief from the district court's preliminary injunction. The June 5 hearing will determine whether that stay should remain in place throughout the appeal or whether work must cease until a final resolution is reached.
The court's order was narrowly procedural and did not decide the merits of the underlying challenge to executive and agency authority. Those substantive questions remain before the judiciary and will be the central issues if and when the appeals court proceeds to full briefing and decision.