The Supreme Court on Monday said President Donald Trump can proceed with construction of his White House ballroom for now, handing a major victory to the administration.
The high court granted the Trump administration’s emergency request Monday to stay a pair of lower court rulings that would have forced it to halt construction of most above-ground components of the sprawling ballroom project.
The unsigned, 5-4 majority ruling is a major victory for Trump, and all but ensures he can complete construction of the sprawling ballroom project before justices can consider the legality of the project.
It also comes despite opposition from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative, who joined his liberal colleagues in dissent.
Roberts had issued an administrative stay ten days earlier clearing the Trump administration to proceed with construction temporarily while justices on the high court weighed how to proceed.
On Monday, however, Roberts notably broke with conservatives on the bench – instead joining Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson in dissent.
‘Construction of the ballroom has proceeded apace for the better part of a year. That construction is likely unlawful,’ Roberts said Monday, noting the majority ruling was ‘no victory for the separation of powers.’
President Donald Trump tours White House ballroom construction progress along the project’s exterior in May
From left, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Elena Kagan, Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Amy Coney Barrett at the State of the Union in February. Roberts said construction of Trump’s ballroom project is ‘likely unlawful’
Trump participates is seen in the East Room of the White House
The massive White House project is slated to include both a 90,000-square-foot above-ground ballroom, as well as an extensive underground component, which Trump administration officials have argued is critical for purposes of national security, as well as physical security.
The high court concluded that hat the National Trust for Historic Preservation – or the group that sued the Trump administration over the ballroom project last year – likely lacked the standing to do so.
They did not address the larger question of whether Trump had the legal authority to unilaterally order the project to proceed without congressional approval.
‘Today, we do not pass upon the legality of the government’s East Wing project. We conclude only that, based on the submissions before us, the government is likely to prevail in showing that the Trust lacks… standing to challenge the project in federal court,’ the high court’s majority concluded.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login