Droning on and on<\/h2>\n
The latest setback came Friday, courtesy of Judges Patricia Millett and Brad Garcia, appointed to the DC Circuit by \u201cBarack Hussein Obama\u201d and \u201cSleepy Joe Biden.\u201d Over the dissent of \u201cHighly Respected Judge, Neomi Rao\u201d [sic], the three-judge panel affirmed the district court\u2019s order blocking above-grade construction of Trump\u2019s 90,000-square-foot Mar-a-Lago replica.<\/p>\n
Naturally, Trump spent the weekend posting AI slop of the ballroom\u2019s roof captioned \u201cDrone Port.\u201d<\/p>\n Tanker trucks on the roof are confusing, but the law here is not. Congress has delegated limited powers to the President for the \u201ccare, maintenance, repair, alternation, refurnishing, improvement, air-conditioning, heating, and lighting (including electric power and fixtures) of the Executive Residence at the White House\u201d pursuant to 3 U.S.C. \u00a7 105(d)<\/a>. That\u2019s why no one\u2019s suing Trump over the tacky gold shit<\/a> he keeps stapling to the walls at the White House. But under 40 U.S.C. \u00a7 8106<\/a>, \u201cA building or structure shall not be erected on any reservation, park, or public grounds of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia without express authority of Congress.\u201d A gigantic ballroom is obviously a \u201cbuilding or structure,\u201d and Congress has not expressly authorized Trump and pals to build one in President\u2019s Park.<\/p>\n This is likely why Trump was cagey about his plans, promising in July of 2025 that any \u201crenovations\u201d would \u201cpay total respect\u201d to the existing structure of the East Wing. Then in October, before anyone could rush into court to stop him, Trump knocked down the entire East Wing and dumped<\/a> the rubble at East Potomac Golf Course \u2014 another target of his \u201cbeautification\u201d rampage.<\/p>\n He repeatedly insists that \u201cthe desperately needed, and totally secure Ballroom\u2026 is a Gift from President Trump and Great Patriots of the United States of America. There will be no expense to the American Taxpayer.\u201d In reality, he\u2019s already grabbed<\/a> $352 million in funds designated for the Secret Service \u2014 more than a tenth of the agency\u2019s budget \u2014 to build his ballroom. The New York Times<\/a> now puts the total cost at $600 million, with more than half of it coming from public money. (So much for the gift.)<\/p>\n In December 2025, the National Trust for Historic Preservation sued<\/a> to block construction, arguing the project violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because Trump never secured Congressional approval as required by \u00a7 8106. Initially, the Justice Department argued that the APA did not apply, since construction was being run by the Office of the Executive Residence (EXR), rather than the National Park Service (NPS).<\/p>\n EXR\u2019s job is to oversee floral arrangements and canap\u00e9s at the White House, not major construction. But unlike the National Park Service, EXR is not a federal agency, and so it cannot be held to answer under the APA. Clearly the administration hoped to evade judicial review by parking this illegal construction inside the White House, and at first it actually worked. On February 26, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon denied<\/a> the Trust\u2019s first motion for preliminary injunction, holding that EXR cannot be sued under the APA. But Judge Leon also laid out a very clear roadmap for the Trust to get what it wanted.<\/p>\n \u201cUnfortunately for Plaintiff, its challenge fails because the White House office in question is not an \u2018agency\u2019 under the APA and because Plaintiff did not bring the ultra vires claim necessary to challenge the President\u2019s statutory authority to complete his construction project with private funds and without congressional approval!\u201d he wrote. Hint, hint<\/em>.<\/p>\n Five days later, the Trust amended its complaint<\/a> to add an ultra vires<\/em> claim, and on March 31, Judge Leon granted<\/a> their renewed request for an injunction. \u201cThe President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner!\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n Judge Leon mocked the government\u2019s fallback theory that building Trump\u2019s ballroom was a permissible \u201crenovation\u201d authorized by 3 U.S.C. \u00a7 105(d), noting that such an interpretation would give the President functionally limitless power. \u201cUnder Defendants\u2019 reading, virtually any change to the White House could be framed as an \u2018alteration\u2019 or \u2018improvement,\u2019\u201d he scoffed. \u201cIndeed, some might even view tearing down the White House and building a modern skyscraper in its place as an \u2018improvement.\u2019\u201d Indeed!<\/p>\n The government immediately appealed<\/a> the injunction. But then, in late April, a disturbed man breached the first layer of security at the White House Correspondents\u2019 Dinner in an attempt to assassinate the president. Not wanting to let a good crisis go to waste, the Trump administration howled that this incident demonstrated the desperate need for the ballroom, accusing the plaintiffs of trying to get the president killed. Never mind that, even it if were appropriate to hold the WHCD at the White House, the event would be far too large for Trump\u2019s planned ballroom,<\/p>\n The DOJ filed a truly deranged motion for an indicative ruling<\/a>, demanding that Judge Leon announce that he would tear up the injunction if the government hadn\u2019t yanked it away from him by filing an appeal. The motion, which was signed by the newly-confirmed Attorney General Todd Blanche, as well as senior DOJ officials Stan Woodward and Trent McCotter, refers to the National Trust\u2019s name as \u201cFAKE,\u201d accuses the Trust of \u201cTrump Derangement Syndrome,\u201d and repeats the false claim that the ballroom is \u201cFREE OF CHARGE AS A GIFT TO THE COUNTRY.\u201d The motion was so wildly inappropriate that former White House Counsel Gregory Craig, who represents the Trust, suggested Rule 11 sanctions might be in order.<\/p>\n On top of the intemperate language, the motion floated the brand new claim that the underground bunker and the ballroom were so \u201cknitted, unified, and cohesive\u201d that halting construction of one necessarily stopped the other. This is exactly the opposite of what the government told the court in January, when it swore that underground construction could proceed without locking in the above-grade architecture.<\/p>\n Unsurprisingly, Judge Leon declined to grant the government\u2019s request.<\/p>\n Because Trump has no authority to rebuild the White House without Congressional approval, the DOJ has leaned hard into to standing as a means to defeat this case. It sneers contemptuously that architectural historian Alison Hoagland, the individual plaintiff through whom the Trust claims aesthetic injury, is merely \u201ca single person who walks her dog in the vicinity of the White House.\u201d<\/p>\n In fact, aesthetic standing is a well-established doctrine that has been around for decades. And, as Judge Millett pointed out in her opinion<\/a> affirming the injunction, this \u201ccramped standing theory would deem no one injured by a decision to raze the Statue of Liberty, to obscure the names on the Vietnam War Memorial, or to install a political billboard atop Mount Rushmore.\u201d<\/p>\n She agreed with Judge Leon that the \u201ccare, maintenance, repair, alteration, refurnishing, improvement, air-conditioning, heating, and lighting\u201d referred to in \u00a7 105(d) refers to ordinary maintenance and upkeep, not demolishing an entire structure and building a new one in its place. And so, barring intervention by the Supreme Court, Judge Leon\u2019s injunction will hold. The administration is free to continue work on the underground bunker and other measures it deems necessary to Trump\u2019s personal security, but can\u2019t erect his temple of tackiness.<\/p>\n Naturally Trump vented his spleen on social media.<\/p>\n \u201cWe are not tenants,\u201d he whined, inventing an alternate history in which his predecessors routinely took a wrecking ball to the White House without Congressional approval.<\/p>\n But of course, the White House belongs to the American people, not the president, and Congress gets to decide what happens to it. Everyone currently living there, drone ports and all, is just renting.<\/p>\n Liz Dye<\/a>\u00a0produces the Law and Chaos\u00a0Substack\u00a0<\/a>and\u00a0podcast<\/a>.<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0You can subscribe by clicking the logo:<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n \n The post Bunker Ballroom Blocked<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n Trump has given America so many gifts! An \u201cAmerican Flag Blue\u201d reflecting pool so clear you could swim in it. A state fair packed with luminaries like Dean Cain to celebrate the nation\u2019s semiquincentennial. A giant arch that would make Reich Minister Albert Speer blush. And soon, a beautiful bunker ballroom where the White House\u2019s East Wing once stood. All funded by private donations, at no cost to the taxpayer!<\/p>\n Or he would<\/em> bless us with these bounties, if evil activist judges would quit getting in his way.<\/p>\n The latest setback came Friday, courtesy of Judges Patricia Millett and Brad Garcia, appointed to the DC Circuit by \u201cBarack Hussein Obama\u201d and \u201cSleepy Joe Biden.\u201d Over the dissent of \u201cHighly Respected Judge, Neomi Rao\u201d [sic], the three-judge panel affirmed the district court\u2019s order blocking above-grade construction of Trump\u2019s 90,000-square-foot Mar-a-Lago replica.<\/p>\n Naturally, Trump spent the weekend posting AI slop of the ballroom\u2019s roof captioned \u201cDrone Port.\u201d<\/p>\n Tanker trucks on the roof are confusing, but the law here is not. Congress has delegated limited powers to the President for the \u201ccare, maintenance, repair, alternation, refurnishing, improvement, air-conditioning, heating, and lighting (including electric power and fixtures) of the Executive Residence at the White House\u201d pursuant to 3 U.S.C. \u00a7 105(d)<\/a>. That\u2019s why no one\u2019s suing Trump over the tacky gold shit<\/a> he keeps stapling to the walls at the White House. But under 40 U.S.C. \u00a7 8106<\/a>, \u201cA building or structure shall not be erected on any reservation, park, or public grounds of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia without express authority of Congress.\u201d A gigantic ballroom is obviously a \u201cbuilding or structure,\u201d and Congress has not expressly authorized Trump and pals to build one in President\u2019s Park.<\/p>\n This is likely why Trump was cagey about his plans, promising in July of 2025 that any \u201crenovations\u201d would \u201cpay total respect\u201d to the existing structure of the East Wing. Then in October, before anyone could rush into court to stop him, Trump knocked down the entire East Wing and dumped<\/a> the rubble at East Potomac Golf Course \u2014 another target of his \u201cbeautification\u201d rampage.<\/p>\n He repeatedly insists that \u201cthe desperately needed, and totally secure Ballroom\u2026 is a Gift from President Trump and Great Patriots of the United States of America. There will be no expense to the American Taxpayer.\u201d In reality, he\u2019s already grabbed<\/a> $352 million in funds designated for the Secret Service \u2014 more than a tenth of the agency\u2019s budget \u2014 to build his ballroom. The New York Times<\/a> now puts the total cost at $600 million, with more than half of it coming from public money. (So much for the gift.)<\/p>\n In December 2025, the National Trust for Historic Preservation sued<\/a> to block construction, arguing the project violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because Trump never secured Congressional approval as required by \u00a7 8106. Initially, the Justice Department argued that the APA did not apply, since construction was being run by the Office of the Executive Residence (EXR), rather than the National Park Service (NPS).<\/p>\n EXR\u2019s job is to oversee floral arrangements and canap\u00e9s at the White House, not major construction. But unlike the National Park Service, EXR is not a federal agency, and so it cannot be held to answer under the APA. Clearly the administration hoped to evade judicial review by parking this illegal construction inside the White House, and at first it actually worked. On February 26, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon denied<\/a> the Trust\u2019s first motion for preliminary injunction, holding that EXR cannot be sued under the APA. But Judge Leon also laid out a very clear roadmap for the Trust to get what it wanted.<\/p>\n \u201cUnfortunately for Plaintiff, its challenge fails because the White House office in question is not an \u2018agency\u2019 under the APA and because Plaintiff did not bring the ultra vires claim necessary to challenge the President\u2019s statutory authority to complete his construction project with private funds and without congressional approval!\u201d he wrote. Hint, hint<\/em>.<\/p>\n Five days later, the Trust amended its complaint<\/a> to add an ultra vires<\/em> claim, and on March 31, Judge Leon granted<\/a> their renewed request for an injunction. \u201cThe President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner!\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n Judge Leon mocked the government\u2019s fallback theory that building Trump\u2019s ballroom was a permissible \u201crenovation\u201d authorized by 3 U.S.C. \u00a7 105(d), noting that such an interpretation would give the President functionally limitless power. \u201cUnder Defendants\u2019 reading, virtually any change to the White House could be framed as an \u2018alteration\u2019 or \u2018improvement,\u2019\u201d he scoffed. \u201cIndeed, some might even view tearing down the White House and building a modern skyscraper in its place as an \u2018improvement.\u2019\u201d Indeed!<\/p>\n The government immediately appealed<\/a> the injunction. But then, in late April, a disturbed man breached the first layer of security at the White House Correspondents\u2019 Dinner in an attempt to assassinate the president. Not wanting to let a good crisis go to waste, the Trump administration howled that this incident demonstrated the desperate need for the ballroom, accusing the plaintiffs of trying to get the president killed. Never mind that, even it if were appropriate to hold the WHCD at the White House, the event would be far too large for Trump\u2019s planned ballroom,<\/p>\n The DOJ filed a truly deranged motion for an indicative ruling<\/a>, demanding that Judge Leon announce that he would tear up the injunction if the government hadn\u2019t yanked it away from him by filing an appeal. The motion, which was signed by the newly-confirmed Attorney General Todd Blanche, as well as senior DOJ officials Stan Woodward and Trent McCotter, refers to the National Trust\u2019s name as \u201cFAKE,\u201d accuses the Trust of \u201cTrump Derangement Syndrome,\u201d and repeats the false claim that the ballroom is \u201cFREE OF CHARGE AS A GIFT TO THE COUNTRY.\u201d The motion was so wildly inappropriate that former White House Counsel Gregory Craig, who represents the Trust, suggested Rule 11 sanctions might be in order.<\/p>\n On top of the intemperate language, the motion floated the brand new claim that the underground bunker and the ballroom were so \u201cknitted, unified, and cohesive\u201d that halting construction of one necessarily stopped the other. This is exactly the opposite of what the government told the court in January, when it swore that underground construction could proceed without locking in the above-grade architecture.<\/p>\n Unsurprisingly, Judge Leon declined to grant the government\u2019s request.<\/p>\n Because Trump has no authority to rebuild the White House without Congressional approval, the DOJ has leaned hard into to standing as a means to defeat this case. It sneers contemptuously that architectural historian Alison Hoagland, the individual plaintiff through whom the Trust claims aesthetic injury, is merely \u201ca single person who walks her dog in the vicinity of the White House.\u201d<\/p>\n In fact, aesthetic standing is a well-established doctrine that has been around for decades. And, as Judge Millett pointed out in her opinion<\/a> affirming the injunction, this \u201ccramped standing theory would deem no one injured by a decision to raze the Statue of Liberty, to obscure the names on the Vietnam War Memorial, or to install a political billboard atop Mount Rushmore.\u201d<\/p>\n She agreed with Judge Leon that the \u201ccare, maintenance, repair, alteration, refurnishing, improvement, air-conditioning, heating, and lighting\u201d referred to in \u00a7 105(d) refers to ordinary maintenance and upkeep, not demolishing an entire structure and building a new one in its place. And so, barring intervention by the Supreme Court, Judge Leon\u2019s injunction will hold. The administration is free to continue work on the underground bunker and other measures it deems necessary to Trump\u2019s personal security, but can\u2019t erect his temple of tackiness.<\/p>\n Naturally Trump vented his spleen on social media.<\/p>\n \u201cWe are not tenants,\u201d he whined, inventing an alternate history in which his predecessors routinely took a wrecking ball to the White House without Congressional approval.<\/p>\n But of course, the White House belongs to the American people, not the president, and Congress gets to decide what happens to it. Everyone currently living there, drone ports and all, is just renting.<\/p>\n Liz Dye<\/a>\u00a0produces the Law and Chaos\u00a0Substack\u00a0<\/a>and\u00a0podcast<\/a>.<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0You can subscribe by clicking the logo:<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n Trump has given America so many gifts! An \u201cAmerican Flag Blue\u201d reflecting pool so clear you could swim in it. A state fair packed with luminaries like Dean Cain to celebrate the nation\u2019s semiquincentennial. A giant arch that would make Reich Minister Albert Speer blush. And soon, a beautiful bunker ballroom where the White House\u2019s […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":159949,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-159960","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/law-and-chaos-logo-liz-dye-300x153-G5AHOh.jpg?fit=300%2C153&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159960","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=159960"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159960\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/159949"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=159960"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=159960"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=159960"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2026\/08\/droneport.jpg?resize=1058%2C1130&ssl=1\" "\\"\\"")
<\/figure>\nToday blinis, tomorrow bunkers<\/h2>\n
Reductio ad absurdum<\/h2>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2026\/08\/Screenshot-2026-08-09-at-10.11.27-PM-1024x920.png?resize=1024%2C920&ssl=1\" "\\"\\"")
\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2025\/06\/law-and-chaos-logo-liz-dye-300x153.jpg?resize=300%2C153&ssl=1\" "\\"\\""){kind=logo}
<\/a><\/figure>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2026\/01\/GettyImages-2254793633-300x200.jpg?resize=300%2C200&ssl=1\" "\\"\\"")
<\/figure>\n
\n<\/a><\/figure>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"