WASHINGTON \u2014 A federal judge on Thursday rejected a preservationist group\u2019s request to block the Trump administration from continuing construction of a $400 million ballroom where it demolished the East Wing of the White House.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled that the National Trust for Historic Preservation was unlikely to succeed on the merits of its bid to temporarily halt President Donald Trump\u2019s project. He said the privately funded group based its challenge on a \u201cragtag group of theories\u201d under the Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution, and would have a better chance of success if it amended the lawsuit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cUnfortunately, because both sides initially focused on the President\u2019s constitutional authority to destruct and construct the East Wing of the White House, Plaintiff didn\u2019t bring the necessary cause of action to test the statutory authority the President claims is the basis to do this construction project without the blessing of Congress and with private funds,\u201d the judge wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The preservationists sought an order pausing the ballroom project until it undergoes multiple independent reviews and wins approval from Congress.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Trump used his social media account to hail the ruling as \u201cGreat news for America.\u201d The Republican president said the project was ahead of schedule and under budget and \u201cwill stand long into the future as a symbol to the Greatness of America.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The preservationists did not immediately respond to a request for comment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The White House announced the ballroom project over the summer. By late October, the Republican president had demolished the East Wing to make way for a ballroom that he said will fit 999 people. The White House said private donations, including from Trump himself, would pay for the planned construction of a 90,000-square-foot ballroom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Trump proceeded with the project before seeking input from a pair of federal review panels, the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts. Trump has stocked both commission with allies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The arts panel approved the project at a meeting last week. The planning commission is set to discuss it further at a March 5 meeting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
During a preliminary hearing in December, Leon warned the administration to refrain from making decisions on underground work, such as the routing of plumbing and gas lines, that would dictate the scope of future ballroom construction above ground.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The group challenging the project argued that Trump could be emboldened to go further \u2014 and possibly demolish the White House\u2019s West Wing or Executive Mansion \u2014 if the court did not intervene.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe losers will be (the) American public, who will be left with a massive ballroom that not only overwhelms what is perhaps the nation\u2019s most historically important building, but will have been built in violation of an astonishingly wide range of laws,\u201d plaintiffs\u2019 attorneys wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The administration said in a court filing that above-ground construction on the ballroom would not begin until April. In the meantime, government lawyers argued, the preservationist group\u2019s challenge was premature because the building plans were not final.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The administration also argued that other presidents did not need congressional approval for previous White House renovation projects, large and small.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cMany of those projects were highly controversial in their time yet have since become accepted\u2014even beloved\u2014parts of the White House,\u201d government lawyers wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Leon, who was nominated to the bench by Republican President George W. Bush, said the White House office behind the project is not an agency covered under the jurisdiction of the Administrative Procedure Act. The judge also said the preservationists, who argued that the ballroom usurped the authority of Congress, did not have the basis to invoke the power of the courts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As a result, \u201cI cannot reach the merits of the National Trust\u2019s novel and weighty statutory arguments\u201d at this time, Leon said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n