General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFederal judge sets new limits on Trump ballroom construction
Judge Richard Leon clarified that some national security work can continue while the overall project is halted.
Link to tweet
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/04/16/judge-trump-ballroom-limits/
National security is not a blank check to proceed with otherwise unlawful activity, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon wrote Thursday. He said the Trump administration could also take steps to secure the construction site to make it safe for people on the White House grounds.
Leon, an appointee of President George W. Bush, last month ordered a halt to Trumps planned $400 million project, ruling that it could not continue until the president obtains approval from Congress. But Leon permitted further construction to ensure the safety and security of the White House after Trump officials said work on an underground emergency bunker was necessary to protect the president, his family and his staff......
No matter how much the Defendants insist otherwise, the lack of a massive ballroom on the White House grounds is not a national-security emergency, lawyers for the National Trust wrote in a filing Tuesday. They noted that Trump continues to live at the White House and entertain foreign dignitaries, despite the administrations claim that the current situation poses a security risk.
The National Trusts lawyers also called attention to the Justice Departments shifting arguments over the projects scope. The Trump administration initially maintained that the underground work was separate from the aboveground ballroom, an argument that Leon considered when he declined to pause the project last year and allowed the underground work to continue.
AZJonnie
(3,779 posts)With this decision, once the work begins, he can claim to say it's too loud at the WH due to the construction so he's moving out for the duration? Wouldn't surprise me.
LetMyPeopleVote
(180,646 posts)Vinca
(54,135 posts)done for security reasons. Wonder if that was ever mentioned. Makes no sense to build something that is supposed to be an underground bunker for the POTUS if it isn't secure.
LetMyPeopleVote
(180,646 posts)This might seem like a simple story about hypocrisy, but a closer look suggests an even more important element.
The problem(s) with the White House using foreign steel for its ballroom project
— Erics_Mom ðð (@ericsmom2006.bsky.social) 2026-04-09T16:56:50.707Z
This might seem like a simple story about hypocrisy, but a closer look suggests an even more important element.
www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/the-problems-with-the-white-house-using-foreign-steel-for-its-ballroom-project
As is often the case, however, there seems to be a gap between the presidents public posturing and his private decisions. The New York Times reported:
President Trump has championed the U.S. steel industry, promising to strengthen it and to impose stiff tariffs on foreign metals to shield manufacturers from overseas competitors.
Yet the White House has secured tens of millions of dollars worth of donated foreign steel for Mr. Trumps $400 million ballroom project, according to two people familiar with the plans who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive and private conversations.
....At first blush, this might appear to be a simple story about hypocrisy: Trump claims to champion U.S. steel, but given a chance to use it for his beloved ballroom, the Republican turned to the same foreign product hes previously denounced.
But look closer at the story and a more controversial angle emerges.
Last fall at an event for ballroom donors, the president boasted that a great steel company had reached out to him about making a generous gift.
He said, Sir, Id like to donate the steel for your ballroom, Trump told his audience, without identifying the person he allegedly spoke to. I said, Whoa, thats nice. And I found out How much is the steel? I called the contractor. Sir, its down for $37 million. I said, This is a nice donation, right?
The president went on to assure his events attendees that this would be great steel as opposed to garbage steel, because they dump a lot of garbage around. You know, steel is like everything else, including human beings. Steel could be high quality, and it can be low quality. He wants to make sure its high quality.
What Trump neglected to mention was he was apparently referring to ArcelorMittal, a Luxembourg-based firm, which is donating steel produced in Europe for the structure of the ballroom project, according to the Times.....
A White House official suggested it was a coincidence that the donation and the tariff exemption happened within a few days of each other. Of course, if Team Trump, which has long struggled with allegations of systemic corruption, believes its earned the benefit of the doubt, its mistaken.
Vinca
(54,135 posts)heard was about an episode in the 1980's during the Cold War when the U.S. Embassy in Moscow had to be torn down because the whole place was bugged.
LetMyPeopleVote
(180,646 posts)For Team Trump, national security becomes the answer to every question
The defense for Trumpâs ballroom? âNational security.â
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2026-04-16T18:17:23.649Z
Why is Trump gutting wind energy? âNational security.â
How did he justify tariffs? âNational security.â
Why does he want Greenland? âNational security.â
Why does he hate the New York Times? âNational security.â
The pattern is not subtle.
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/for-team-trump-national-security-becomes-the-answer-to-every-question
President Trump offered a surprising justification last month for forging ahead with construction of his White House ballroom: Halting the $400 million project would pose a grave threat to national security.
Everything is drone-proof and bulletproof, Mr. Trump said, listing the security features of a bunker being built beneath the ballroom to protect the president in the event of an emergency.
The article noted that this was hardly the first time the administration had invoked national security to justify a contentious decision, which got me thinking about just how long the administrations list has become:
In December, after the administration took new steps to destroy the wind energy industry, with moves that even some of the presidents allies saw as radical, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said the move was necessary due to national security risks.
Around the same time, Trump renewed his effort to annex Greenland and told reporters, We need Greenland for national security.
As part of a weird online harangue against the Times, the president justified his offensive by claiming that the newspaper is a serious threat to the National Security of our Nation.
The White House tried to defend its trade tariffs agenda in part by pointing to national security concerns.
When administration officials decided to ignore protections for endangered species and allow additional oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, they justified the move on national security grounds.
When the president targeted collective bargaining contracts for hundreds of thousands of federal employees, the White House defended the decision by saying their functions touch on national security.
With increasing frequency, in other words, the White House sees national security as the answer to every question. (Im tempted to describe it as officials Trump card, though that might be a little too on the nose.)....
On Thursday, a federal judge issued a new order halting construction on the ballroom project, concluding that White House officials were not fully complying with an earlier ruling. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon explained that national security is not a blank check to proceed with otherwise unlawful activity.
It was exactly the kind of rebuke the White House has been desperate to avoid.