Dorothy

The group urged the court not to let construction continue until the legal battle has been resolved.

The question of whether President Donald Trump may, without seeking permission from Congress, demolish much of the White House and replace it with his own projects is now before the Supreme Court.

The administration “cannot identify any statute granting them ‘express authority’ to destroy a third of the White House and replace it with a massive, privately funded ballroom, because none exists”, trust attorneys wrote.

The administration “cannot identify any statute granting them ‘express authority’ to destroy a third of the White House and replace it with a massive, privately funded ballroom, because none exists,” trust attorneys wrote.

The administration argues that the president, not Congress or the courts, has unimpeded authority to renovate the White House. The current state of the project, essentially an open construction site, makes it harder to protect the White House, the Justice Department contends.

“In the end, the question is not ‘whether the proposed ballroom is desirable, or not, as a matter of policy.’ Nor is it even whether Petitioners may ultimately construct the ballroom. The question is simply who decides whether a ballroom can be built on federal property. Our constitutional system and federal law commits that choice to Congress,” the preservationist group’s brief reads.

In its emergency application for stay, the Trump administration requested the high court to temporarily pause a preliminary injunction by D.C. District Senior Judge Richard Leon. Issued by the Bush 43 appointee earlier this year, the order barred the White House from undertaking above-ground construction on the privately-funded project because he said it lacked congressional approval.

Chief Justice John Roberts faces a critical stay decision on the D.C. Circuit's order blocking Trump's White House East Wing construction project. Read Full Article ⟶