The US Supreme Court has allowed President Donald Trump to continue construction of a new ballroom at the White House, delivering a major victory to the administration as opponents challenge the legality of the project.
The conservative-majority court voted 5-4 to lift a lower court order that had stopped work on the ballroom. Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court’s three liberal justices in dissenting from the decision.
Roberts had earlier issued a temporary order allowing construction to continue while the Supreme Court considered the case.
Trump welcomed the ruling and said the decision removed the remaining obstacles facing the project. He said construction would now move forward with completion expected by the middle of 2028.
Opponents argue that Trump exceeded his authority by ordering the demolition of the entire White House East Wing to make way for the development. A lawsuit brought by the National Trust for Historic Preservation will continue in the lower courts, where the legal dispute could take months or even years to resolve.
The Supreme Court’s ruling did not decide whether the ballroom project itself is lawful. Instead, the justices ruled that construction could proceed while the wider case continues.
The five-member majority said the government was likely to prevail in the lawsuit because the National Trust may not have legal standing to bring the case.
The organisation’s lawsuit relies partly on the claims of Alison Hoagland, a Washington resident and National Trust member. She argues that the completed ballroom would harm her aesthetic, cultural and historical interests because of its size and impact on the White House complex.
The majority questioned whether such concerns amounted to the kind of specific injury required under the US Constitution for someone to bring a case in federal court. The justices said disagreement or opposition to a government project generally does not establish the necessary legal standing.
The dissenting justices took a sharply different position. They argued that the ballroom project was likely unlawful because Congress had not given the administration the express authority needed to carry out such a major alteration to the White House complex.
They also rejected the majority’s view that Hoagland’s claims were insufficient to establish standing.
The legal dispute has focused on the ballroom, but the wider project also includes a military facility described as a bunker. A district court and later an appeals court had ordered work on the ballroom to stop while allowing construction of the military facility to continue.
Trump has described the ballroom as necessary for hosting large galas, state dinners and other official events. He has also highlighted the security importance of the military facility.
With the Supreme Court’s latest decision, work on the ballroom can proceed while the lower courts continue to consider the broader legal challenge.
