Post New

President Trump’s ballroom design has barely been scrutinized. Architects say it shows.

The National Capital Planning Commission is scheduled on Thursday to take a final vote approving President Trump’s ballroom, clearing the last review for a major addition to the White House that was publicly unveiled in detail only in January. Last month, another panel led by the president’s allies, the Commission of Fine Arts, discussed the ballroom for 12 minutes before unanimously approving it.

The hurried reviews, with construction cranes already swiveling above the White House grounds, are an abrupt departure from how new monuments, museums and even modest renovations have been designed and refined in the capital for decades. And the ballroom will be worse off for it, architects warn.

Gifted article:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/03/29/ups...

Lots of illustrations.

From the comments:

I'm an architect. All of the exterior flaws in the design are just the start. At the speed it is getting designed and built, I'm sure there will acoustics issues, ventilation issues, kitchen flow and serving problems...Just like everything DJT does, it will be a failure that he blames on someone else.

And will probably require vast sums to try and FIX.

Lots of illustrations.

A particularly vexing "feature" is that the huge ballroom will jut into and block the deliberately planned line of sight along Pennsylvania Ave. from The Capital to the White House proper. Seems like deliberate symbolism to imply that the Executive branch actions are no longer accountable to the Legislative branch. Grrr.

From the Times article (thanks for the gifted link!):

“The ballroom is literally an imposition between two branches of our government,” said David Scott Parker, an architect on the board of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and one of more than 30,000 people who wrote to the planning commission objecting to the building.

A wrecking ball will be the fix.

Plus, the Courts have said that all work must stop until Congress approves the funding. Just read that yesterday.

Plus, the Courts have said that all work must stop until Congress approves the funding. Just read that yesterday

Isn’t President Trump and other donors paying for the ballroom and the Country is not?
Methinks ‘someone’ put this judge up to do no good.

Isn’t President Trump and other donors paying for the ballroom and the Country is not?

Is there a statute that grants the President the authority to accept outside donations and use the proceeds to construct facilities on federal property?

Under our system of government, the President's powers are limited to: i) executing the laws passed by Congress; and ii) the other powers specifically granted by the Constitution (to appoint officers of the U.S., to make treaties, etc.). If there isn't a statute that says the President has the power to do something, he generally doesn't have the power to do it (again, absent the Constitutional authorities).

The judge concluded that Congress has not given the President the authority to do this. They obviously haven't appropriated funds to do it, and they haven't given him the authority to accept outside funds in lieu of an appropriation to do it. Since the judge has determined that the President isn't executing an existing law in doing this, and since there's no independent Constitutional grant of power to do this, then it's outside the scope of his authority.

then it's outside the scope of his authority.

So now what? Just let the ballroom sit as it is and let it rot?
It’s obvious some Trump hater put this judge up to no good.

So now what? Just let the ballroom sit as it is and let it rot?

Congress has to approve a new building. If the judge's analysis is correct, Trump tore down the prior East Wing without having the authority to construct a new building. That's a bad outcome - but a President who doesn't comply with the law can cause terrible things to happen. That doesn't give him the ability to spend hundreds of millions of dollars, whether from the general fund or from prior donations, to do whatever he wants on federal land without the legal authority to do that.

It’s obvious some Trump hater put this judge up to no good.

Why? Do you think there's some statute out there that does give the President the authority to construct buildings on federal land using outside funds at his sole discretion? Perhaps you could point to it.

judge said safety work can continue, after which trump immediately declared the entire project was safety related.

how are people so clueless on trump when\if grift likely involved.

Isn’t President Trump and other donors paying for the ballroom and the Country is not?

Nobody knows for sure in this Project 2025 administration. Trump's kayfabe has eliminated transparency while convincing MAGA that opacity is transparency.

What we do now is that the Trumps are self-serving liars enriching themselves at a level nobody could have imagined. Billions and billions enriching themselves in violation of the emolument clause and ethical norms.

MAGA generally says 'they're pretty smart if they can get away with it'; a sad state of affairs worthy of the most vile autocracies (Putin, Orban, Peron).

Eliminating consumer protections, empowering white collar thieves and frauds... it's Major Ass Grifting America

It’s obvious some Trump hater put this judge up to no good.

LOL. Yeah, them right-wing appointed judges and constitutionalists are real bastards, following the law like that.

How can they not understand that "When you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything."

That needs to go in the Constitution.

Even "Grab them by the pussy."

Isn’t President Trump and other donors paying for the ballroom and the Country is not?

If you rented a garage apartment to a renter over your garage, does that renter have the right to knock out a wall in order to put in a jacuzzi and paint the walls purple without your permission?

Really, you shouldn’t worry about it. His friends are paying for it and he assures you it will be beautiful when he finishes the job.

Why? Do you think there's some statute out there that does give the President the authority to construct buildings on federal land using outside funds at his sole discretion? Perhaps you could point to it.

If it was deemed a problem why didn’t ‘they’ go after it from the get go, like
when Trump first made the announcement of the ballroom plans instead of waiting
this long into the project?
Sorry, I smell a rat here.

If it was deemed a problem why didn’t ‘they’ go after it from the get go, like when Trump first made the announcement of the ballroom plans instead of waiting this long into the project?

That confirms that either you exist in a right-wing echo chamber, or you're trying to pull an April 1 gag.

"Going after it" began as soon as the plan oozed from Trump's lying piehole.

If it was deemed a problem why didn’t ‘they’ go after it from the get go, like
when Trump first made the announcement of the ballroom plans instead of waiting
this long into the project?

The time between his announcement of the demolition and the completion of the demolition was less than a week.

If it was deemed a problem why didn’t ‘they’ go after it from the get go, like when Trump first made the announcement of the ballroom plans instead of waiting this long into the project?

They did. They filed a formal demand letter in October of 2025 notifying the Administration that they weren't following the law - even before Trump tore down the East Wing in late October. They filed suit in December 2025.

They're not "waiting this long into the project," and they have be "after it from the get go." It's not their fault that the Administration has chosen to completely ignore all of the folks who have been loudly and consistently pointing out - correctly - that they shouldn't be doing this without Congressional approval.

LOL. Yeah, them right-wing appointed judges and constitutionalists are real bastards, following the law like that.

That’s right. Judge Richard Leon was appointed by President George Bush.
The Bush Family hates, loathe, can’t stand President Trump back from the time he humiliate Jeb Bush
knocking him out of the race for president back in 2016 labeling him with the
nickname Low Energy Jeb.
Jeb couldn’t shake off the humiliating name, lost his backers and left the race.

The Bush Family never forgave Trump, neither did the Cheney family.

Jeb was suppose to follow in the family footsteps as the next Bush President.

So I suppose this stoppage came from President Bush, it’s not the first time he has
interfered with Trump’s doings, including the Cheney family.

So I suppose this stoppage came from President Bush

LM, have you considered the possibility that this stoppage comes from the fact that the plaintiffs were correct? That the President doesn't have the inherent power to just build whatever he wants to on federal land without getting Congressional approval for either an appropriation or to use outside funds in lieu of an appropriation?

The time between his announcement of the demolition and the completion of the demolition was less than a week.

And after he had lyingly assured everyone he wouldn't touch the East Wing.

LM, have you considered the possibility that this stoppage comes from the fact that the plaintiffs were correct? That the President doesn't have the inherent power to just build whatever he wants to on federal land without getting Congressional approval for either an appropriation or to use outside funds in lieu of an appropriation?

As I said this stoppage should have happened from the get go.
Being this far into the project, problems will iron out and the ballroom will eventually be completed.

That the President doesn't have the inherent power to just build whatever he wants to on federal land without getting Congressional approval for either an appropriation or to use outside funds in lieu of an appropriation?

The ballroom is being funded by outside donations:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/whos-paying-...

You can see the list.

At any rate. This is fixed by having Congress appropriate $0.01 dollars to the construction of the ballroom in the next budget bill.

It’s obvious some Trump hater put this judge up to no good.

Don’t you just hate it when a judge follows the law.

Outrageous!

As I said this stoppage should have happened from the get go.

How? That the project should have been stopped before the Administration even had developed plans for the new structure (which only were released in February)? Or before even the first meeting of any governmental body to consider those plans (the NCPC didn't review them until March)?

That's not how courts work. If the Administration announces that they have "plans" for a new ballroom, you can't just go into court and ask a judge to "stop" that based on an announcement. There needs to be actual government action that you are asking the judge to enjoin, and a material step being taken by the government in furtherance of that action before the judge can step in. There has to be the prospect of "irreparable harm."

The plaintiffs filed their lawsuit in December - months before the Ballroom even had final design plans. They requested an injunction at that time. The judge refrained from granting that request for a preliminary injunction because the government told them that the project wasn't close to moving forward yet:

Finally, the Court takes seriously the Government's representations that its plans are not yet final, that it will commence consultations with the NCPC and CFA by the end of this month, and that no above-grade construction will take place before April 2026. If there is any below-grade construction that dictates the size or scale of the proposed ballroom before the Court can act on plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, then the Government should be prepared to take it down depending on the Court's resolution of the merits of this case.

https://cdn.savingplaces.org/2025/12/19/14/11/18/c...

IOW, the reason that the court didn't rule on the injunction in December is because the government told the court it was premature for them to rule on it. Once the plans were finalized, and they did conduct those consultations with the NCPC and CFA (which happened in March), the matter was finally ripe for a ruling on the request for preliminary injunction.

The ballroom is being funded by outside donations:

The judge found no statutory provision giving the President the authority to accept outside donations to fund this project. The President has no inherent Constitutional power to build buildings on federal land - any authority he has would have to be in executing a law that Congress has passed.

The government was unable to point to any such law. Do you know of one?

At any rate. This is fixed by having Congress appropriate $0.01 dollars to the construction of the ballroom in the next budget bill.

As simple as that? Cool.

As simple as that? Cool.


Obviously not.

At any rate. This is fixed by having Congress appropriate $0.01 dollars to the construction of the ballroom in the next budget bill.

How would the Administration build the ballroom with only $0.01 in funding?

So now what? Just let the ballroom sit as it is and let it rot?

Basically, yes. That's what happens when you start doing major work without proper authorization. Happens to individuals all the time when they fail to comply with the building permit process. They get hit with stop work orders, and can't continue the work until they comply with the law.

It’s obvious some Trump hater put this judge up to no good.

Just another lie.

What is obvious is that you are butt-hurt that your Messiah Trump is being held to account for not following the law. You seem to believe that he should be above the law, that he should be able to do whatever he wants whenever he wants.

The sad part is that you will probably continue to believe that he is above the law, spouting rants and lies, right up until the point that Trump's lawlessness hits you square in the face in some significant way. And then you'll expect some sympathy for your terrible plight. But you'll get none.

--Peter

The judge found no statutory provision giving the President the authority to accept outside donations to fund this project. The President has no inherent Constitutional power to build buildings on federal land - any authority he has would have to be in executing a law that Congress has passed.

The government was unable to point to any such law. Do you know of one?

Which would be why all that needs to happen is for Congress to appropriate exactly 1 penny to the renovation of the ballroom. There's your statutory authorization.

As simple as that? Cool.

Yep. Because as soon as a budgetary line item for $0.01 for "renovations to the White House buildings and grounds, as determined by the President" is in there, that becomes the "statutory" authorization.

And for those who want to say "bbbbut Congress has to approve the exact design" and what not, don't: Obamacare is shot through with "the Secretary shall..." determine this or that. Meaning that there is ample precedent for Congress to delegate much to the executive branch, and that will be done here.

Sorry, I smell a rat here.

You are smelling Spankee, Kegsbreath, Kavanaugh, Noem, and the rest of your MAGA-hood.

They all bathe in the DC sewers (literally).

Why hasn't Spankee fixed them yet? He lives in the sewers....

How would the Administration build the ballroom with only $0.01 in funding?

By combining it with the $300 million donated by private citizens and companies.

It’s obvious some Trump hater put this judge up to no good.

That doesn't narrow things down much, does it, Squeaky?—since the entire country except for a dwindling few remaining blockheads loathes that pedophile piece of shit.

Which would be why all that needs to happen is for Congress to appropriate exactly 1 penny to the renovation of the ballroom. There's your statutory authorization.

Well, that only authorizes the Administration to spend one penny. Per the judge's order on the preliminary injunction, the Administration also lacks any statutory authority allowing it to accept outside funds and direct them to the project:

The President may at any time go to Congress to obtain express authority to construct a ballroom and to do so with private funds. Indeed, Congress may even choose to appropriate funds for the ballroom, or at least decide that some other funding scheme is acceptable.

https://cdn.savingplaces.org/2026/03/31/17/32/14/0...

That's in the conclusion, but it's of a piece with the substantive discussion elsewhere in the opinion that Congress has not authorized the President to accept private donations to fund the ballroom, and that such authorization would be necessary for him to be able to do that.

Perhaps that's not all that much of a difference, because I suspect that any bill that could get through Congress containing the former could also include the latter. But I don't think just adding a penny in appropriations alone would do it.

By combining it with the $300 million donated by private citizens and companies.

But they would need Congressional authorization to be able to accept those private donations and use them for this purpose. The President doesn't have any authority to just take money from private parties for his own preferred uses, and he doesn't have the authority to let private parties build things on government land. Well, at least the judge has found as a preliminary matter that the Administration hasn't successfully identified any source of such claimed authority.

Well, that only authorizes the Administration to spend one penny. Per the judge's order on the preliminary injunction, the Administration also lacks any statutory authority allowing it to accept outside funds and direct them to the project:

Which would be addressed by the budget line item. Easy peasy.

That's in the conclusion, but it's of a piece with the substantive discussion elsewhere in the opinion that Congress has not authorized the President to accept private donations to fund the ballroom, and that such authorization would be necessary for him to be able to do that.

And...? Here, let's amend the legislation ourselves:

Sec. 100004243 (z): Authorization for General Improvements to White House Grounds and Buildings
The sum of $0.01 in Fiscal Year 2027 is authorized for general improvements to the White House, its grounds, and adjacent buildings. The appropriation may be combined with external donations and the project(s) under the discretion of the President.

Voila. Done.

As I said this stoppage should have happened from the get go.
Being this far into the project, problems will iron out and the ballroom will eventually be completed.

And then the ballroom will be demolished, and the east wing will be brought back to life, and Jackie Kennedy's rose garden will be restored and all traces of this cancerous administration will be wiped from sight, and many a henchperson will be doing time.

And a dwindling number of dummies like you will keep eating the MAGA shit and shitting it out and eating it again.

Happy happy joy joy!

Voila. Done.

Sure. Lots of ways to skin the cat. No one disputes that Congress could allow this ballroom project to move forward. The conflict is over Trump's claims that he can do it without Congressional approval.

He can't, at least per this ruling. He can go to Congress and ask for approval at any time. But he might not. He doesn't seem to accept being told he can't do something, and many of his supporters are likely to just believe the same thing that LM was saying in this thread - that this is just a judge out to get him, and not the result of him really not complying with the law. Plus, unless there's appetite for a second reconciliation package (and there might not be), he might not be able to get that authorization through the House....

The time between his announcement of the demolition and the completion of the demolition was less than a week.

There was a 100' long fence encroaching 2' over the landmarks of a lot I wanted to buy and build on.

The realtor told me "No problem. When the people are at work, we'll bring in an excavator, take out the fence, put up a plastic construction fence from the sidewalk to the alley between the survey marks, then go do lunch."

His strategy was that it's better to haggle after it's gone than possibly get into a long drawn out arbitration, and maybe the arbitration says the fence gets to stay where it is.

The conflict is over Trump's claims that he can do it without Congressional approval.

Ehhh. Easily solved. This is the kind of thing you bury in the budget bill next to the black programs and $9000 for a hammer.

"The Bush Family hates, loathe, can’t stand President Trump...from back in 2016"

Fascinating!

Bush appointed Judge Leon in 2002.

Perhaps Bush clairvoyant, seeing far into the future, and only MAGAs know it?

Ehhh. Easily solved. This is the kind of thing you bury in the budget bill next to the black programs and $9000 for a hammer.

Are there any budget bills left (other than DHS) that remain to be passed this year?

Are there any budget bills left (other than DHS) that remain to be passed this year?

The next fiscal year starts in October; they'll need to pass something then.

They're not "waiting this long into the project," and they have be "after it from the get go." It's not their fault that the Administration has chosen to completely ignore all of the folks who have been loudly and consistently pointing out - correctly - that they shouldn't be doing this without Congressional approval.

I'm surprised there wasn't an injunction before he could knock down anything. I thought those could be obtained very quickly while the main question was adjudicated.

His style is to do something, and then claim "we already did it...too late, losers".

I recall a story that Patton advanced in an area that he wasn't supposed to, and when challenged by his superiors (like Ike), he asked "do you want me to give it back?".

MAGA seems to be about doing whatever they want regardless of the law, and then by the time you are able to stop them legally, it's already done. Whether knocking down part of the WH, or rapidly deporting people to El Salvadoran prisons, or whatever illegal thing they want to do. And then it's not that it's illegal, it's that there is some "radical liberal activist judge" saying it's illegal.

MAGA seems to be about doing whatever they want regardless of the law, and then by the time you are able to stop them legally, it's already done. Whether knocking down part of the WH, or rapidly deporting people to El Salvadoran prisons, or whatever illegal thing they want to do. And then it's not that it's illegal, it's that there is some "radical liberal activist judge" saying it's illegal.

Let's ask Joe Biden about ignoring the Supreme Court at will. (This statement above is not only false, it attempts to accuse the right of doing things the left celebrates when their side does it).

Student loan forgiveness ring a bell?

$9000 for a hammer.

Describe those hammers, in detail. IMO, you do NOT have a clue--and you personally post that fact for the public to see all the time.

Bush appointed Judge Leon in 2002.

Perhaps Bush clairvoyant, seeing far into the future, and only MAGAs know it?

Here is a little history of the animosity between the Bush family and president Trump.
One can easily imagine Bush dropping a hint or two to the judge. There has been no end to the rivalry. It continues to this day.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/01/trump-bu...

I'm surprised there wasn't an injunction before he could knock down anything.

No one filed for an injunction before he knocked anything down. I don't know if anyone had even filed suit yet. I don't think they expected he would just go ahead and demolish before there was a replacement lined up.

One can easily imagine Bush dropping a hint or two to the judge.

That one would be you.

Classic MAGA/GOP tactic. accusation = confession. Just because you can imagine your pussy grabber doing that shit doesn't mean the Bush's do it too.

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.