The demolition of the East Wing of the White House during construction of U.S. President Donald Trump's proposed ballroom is seen from the reopened Washington Monument, following the longest shutdown of the government in Washington, D.C., U.S., Nov. 15, 2025.
Jessica Koscielniak | Reuters
A federal judge in a revised order on Thursday blocked the Trump administration from above-ground construction work on the controversial proposed White House ballroom.
But Judge Richard Leon’s order allows the administration to continue below-ground construction, including work related to national security facilities.
Leon is also allowing above-ground construction “that is strictly necessary to cover, secure, and protect such national security facilities,” as long as that construction does not “lock in the above-ground size and scale of the ballroom,” according to his injunction in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.
The order comes five days after the federal Circuit Court of Appeals in D.C. told Leon to clarify his prior order issued on March 31, which enjoined the Trump administration from taking any action to build the planned $400 million, 90,000 square-foot ballroom where the White House’s East Wing once stood. The East Wing was demolished last year to make way for the project at the behest of President Donald Trump.
The appeals court specifically told Leon to reconsider the potential national security implications of blocking the construction. The administration had told the appeals court that Leon’s injunction was “threatening grave national-security harms to the White House, the President and his family, and the President’s staff.”
Leon, in an opinion on Thursday, said, “The Court has taken Defendants’ invocation of national security and presidential security seriously throughout this case, which is why I included a safety-and-security exception in my original Order.”
“But national security is not a blank check to proceed with otherwise unlawful activity, and belated assertions that the above-ground ballroom is ‘inseparable’ from an array of security features … are not an occasion for this Court to reweigh the equities or reconsider the preliminary injunction!,” the judge wrote.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States is suing the Trump administration to block the ballroom from being built.
Leon, in two prior decisions, had declined requests by that group to halt the project.
But in his March 31 ruling to issue an injunction against the ballroom, Leon said that no law “come close” to giving Trump the power to build such a structure at the White House without authorization by Congress.
That injunction excluded work that is “strictly necessary to ensure the safety and security of the White House and its grounds, including the ballroom construction site, and provide for the personal safety of the President and his staff.”
“The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner,” Leon wrote in a memorandum opinion explaining his ruling that day.
In his amended order on Thursday, the judge slapped down arguments by the Trump administration that the entire ballroom project could proceed on national security grounds.
“Defendants argue that the entire ballroom construction project, from tip to tail, falls within the safety-and-security exception and therefore may proceed unabated,” Leon wrote in an opinion issued on Thursday, with the amended injunction. “That is neither a reasonable nor a correct reading of my Order!”
“The accompanying opinion stated that ‘the ballroom construction project must stop until Congress authorizes its completion,’ ” Leon noted.
“It is, to say the least, incredible, if not disingenuous, that Defendants now argue that my Order does not stop ballroom construction because of the safety-and-security exception!”
The judge said that the new order, in enjoining above-ground construction from proceeding, directly addresses the risk that the National Trust would suffer irreparable harm by building of the ballroom.
And, “The exception for underground national security facilities does not include the proposed ballroom because Defendants themselves distinguished between below-ground and above-ground construction, stating that “the below-surface work is driven by national security concerns independent of the above-grade construction,” the judge said.
