A federal appeals court has temporarily allowed construction on a proposed White House ballroom project to resume, reversing a lower court’s order that halted work late last month.
In a 2-1 decision issued April 11, judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that construction can continue at least through the week while legal questions surrounding the project are further reviewed.
The decision relates to a ballroom project backed by Donald Trump, which had been paused following a March 31 ruling by U.S. District Senior Judge Richard Leon. Leon had determined that the president may not have the authority to proceed with major alterations to the White House without congressional approval.
The federal government’s appeal argued that halting construction could pose safety and security risks, particularly due to ongoing work tied to below-ground infrastructure.
According to court filings, the project includes “national security upgrades,” prompting officials to push for continued activity at the jobsite to ensure those elements remain protected.
In response, the appeals court directed Judge Leon to “promptly address the pending motion to clarify how the injunction and its exception will ensure safety and security” as the case proceeds.
Judges Patricia Millett and Bradley Garcia, who formed the majority, emphasized uncertainty around which portions of the project are essential to national security and therefore should continue without interruption.
“As a result, it remains unclear whether and to what extent the development of certain aspects of the proposed ballroom is necessary to ensure the safety and security of those below-ground national security upgrades or otherwise to ensure the safety of the White House and its occupants while the appeal proceeds,” the ruling stated.
The ruling was not unanimous. In a dissenting opinion, Judge Neomi Rao argued that halting construction could prolong potential vulnerabilities, suggesting that work should proceed without restriction.
Rao wrote that security concerns tied to the project justified granting the government’s request to continue construction activities.
The appeals court’s decision does not resolve the broader legal dispute but instead allows work to continue temporarily while the lower court reexamines key questions related to presidential authority and national security implications.
The case underscores the complex legal and operational challenges tied to high-profile federal construction projects, particularly those involving historic sites and security-sensitive infrastructure.
Further rulings from the district court are expected to determine whether construction can proceed beyond the short-term window granted by the appeals panel.
Originally reported by Zachary Phillips, Editor in Construction Dive.
.png)
.png)
