Roughly 150 Democratic lawmakers told a federal appeals court that President Donald Trump cannot move ahead with demolition and reconstruction work tied to a planned White House East Wing ballroom unless Congress authorizes the project.
The filing, submitted May 28 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, argues that Congress has constitutional authority over federal property, federal spending and construction at the White House. The brief was filed in National Trust for Historic Preservation v. National Park Service, a case challenging the Trump administration’s work on the East Wing project.
The lawmakers are led by Rep. Robert Garcia of California, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee; Rep. Jared Huffman of California, the top Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee; and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
The brief says the Constitution gives Congress, not the president alone, control over federal property, including the White House. It also says Congress has not authorized or appropriated money for demolition of the East Wing or construction of the ballroom.
The dispute gives Democrats a court-focused challenge to one of Trump’s most visible Washington projects. The ballroom has already drawn scrutiny over its cost, funding and effect on the White House complex. The new filing narrows the legal fight to a core separation-of-powers question: whether a president can make major structural changes to the White House without clear approval from Congress.
Garcia, Huffman and Whitehouse said in a joint release that the project bypasses Congress and lacks legal authorization. The lawmakers said major White House renovations have historically gone through congressional authorization and appropriations, rather than unilateral executive action.
The filed brief makes the same argument in constitutional terms. It says the White House is federal property and that Congress is responsible for deciding whether parts of federal property should be demolished, reconstructed or expanded. It also points to Congress’s appropriations power, arguing that federal money cannot be drawn from the Treasury except through appropriations made by law.
CBS News reported that the Trump administration has argued a statute allowing White House maintenance and repairs gives it legal authority for the project. CBS also reported that the administration has described the reconstruction as a security matter, while Democratic lawmakers argue that routine-repair authority cannot justify a major ballroom project.
The brief says Congress has repeatedly acted when major White House construction or renovation was needed. It argues that the president does not have independent authority to demolish the East Wing and replace it with a large ballroom without Congress passing a law or providing funds for that purpose.
The case is already moving quickly. The brief’s cover states that oral argument is scheduled for June 5. CBS reported that a district judge previously ruled construction could not proceed without congressional approval, while an appeals panel later allowed construction to continue temporarily before arguments.
The ballroom fight has also pulled in outside government ethics and preservation groups. CBS reported that Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the Campaign Legal Center filed a separate brief warning about potential conflicts tied to private donations for the project. A separate group of architects and preservationists also opposed the administration’s position.
The Democratic lawmakers’ filing does not decide the case. It asks the appeals court to side with the National Trust for Historic Preservation and affirm limits on the administration’s ability to proceed without Congress. The court will decide whether the project can continue while the broader legal challenge moves forward.
The case also gives Democrats a new way to attack Trump’s use of presidential power. Rather than focusing only on the cost or appearance of the ballroom, the lawmakers are arguing that the president is trying to make a permanent change to public property without the branch of government that controls federal buildings and spending.
The administration’s position is that the project falls within existing White House authority and is tied to security and operations. Democrats say that argument stretches repair authority beyond recognition and would allow a president to avoid congressional control over one of the country’s most visible federal properties.
The next major date is June 5, when the D.C. Circuit is scheduled to hear arguments. A ruling against the administration could slow or halt work unless Congress acts. A ruling for the administration could strengthen Trump’s ability to continue the project while the lawsuit proceeds.
For now, the new filing puts the White House ballroom dispute directly into the congressional-power lane. The question before the appeals court is not whether the project is popular or whether the president wants it built. It is whether Trump can use executive authority to remake part of the White House without Congress signing off.