U.S. Supreme Court allows Trump's ballroom project to proceed

Account subscription benefits alongside Premium Stories, Editorials, Opinions and more. Unlock these with Subscription

The demolition of the East Wing of the White House. File | Photo Credit: Reuters

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday (August 31, 2026) allowed President Donald Trump to continue construction of his White House ballroom , granting him a major victory against opponents of the project.

The conservative-dominated court voted 5-4 to lift a lower order demanding construction be halted, with Chief Justice John Roberts notably joining the court's three liberals in dissent.

Mr. Roberts earlier this month issued a temporary order to allow construction while the full court weighed the matter.

The project has roiled Washington, with critics saying Trump acted unlawfully by unilaterally ordering the demolition of the entire White House East Wing.

The court decision means construction will advance, while a lawsuit brought by the National Trust for Historic Preservation will play out in lower courts — a process that could take months or years.

The National Trust did not immediately return AFP's request for comment.

In its decision the court said that the government was likely to eventually win the ongoing lawsuit because the National Trust probably did not have the right to bring the claim in the first place.

The organization's case is grounded by one of its members, Washington resident Alison Hoagland, who claims that seeing the finished ballroom would result in damage to her "aesthetic, cultural, and historical interests," due to its size.

"This Court has not found standing in circumstances like these before. To the contrary, we have repeatedly held that mere offense, disagreement, or distaste does not qualify as a concrete and particularized injury," under the US constitution, the five justices wrote in their ruling.

"Perhaps nearly any government action or project offends someone's sensibilities," they added.

However, those justices made clear that they were not making a final ruling on the legality of the ballroom project, just that construction could continue while the case is argued and decided in lower courts.

The dissenting justices wrote that the project was "likely unlawful," because "Congress has not passed any law resembling 'express authority'" for the administration to undertake it — despite a law requiring it to do so.