DOJ Argues East Wing Ballroom Is Needed for “National Security” Reasons

The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a motion earlier this week to block any future order from a federal judge that could imperil President Donald Trump’s plan to build a massive ballroom on White House grounds, claiming that the construction of the ballroom is a matter of “national security.”

Last week, Judge Richard Leon expressed disbelief over the government’s initial argument in favor of the project resuming — that a privately funded rebuilding of the White House was proper without congressional authorization. When DOJ lawyers compared the plan to demolish the East Wing and construct an enormous ballroom in its place to smaller projects, like building tennis pavilions or swimming pools, Leon was visibly dismayed.

“Come on. Be serious,” he told those lawyers.

A new brief filed late on Monday seeks to preempt any judgment from Leon, stating that the $400 million project is imperative for the country’s security.

“Given the exigencies involved in suspending a major ongoing construction project with national security implications, Defendants are filing this motion in advance of any ruling,” the filing stated, adding that it is “unworkable to distinguish between construction elements that are national security-related and those that are not.”

“Halting construction would imperil the President and others who live and work in the White House,” the new brief says, claiming that the stalling of the project “complicates Secret Service operations.”

Furthermore, the government said that canceling or delaying the project “will endanger national security and therefore impair the public interest.”

The filing also argues that a finished ballroom project is in the nation’s interest for other reasons.

“The new East Wing’s expanded capacity for receiving foreign dignitaries and visitors will substantially benefit the President, [the Executive Office of the President], other governmental offices and agencies with a White House presence, and the American people,” the DOJ argued.

There appears to be only one aspect of the project that actually relates to national security — the construction of an underground bunker beneath the East Wing, after the original bunker was destroyed in the administration’s demolition of the wing last year. There are “top-secret” plans to rebuild the bunker, but that can be done without further construction above ground. Claims that it is a national security imperative are also questionable, given that Trump fasttracked the destruction of the old bunker without much consideration from preservationists or Congress.

It’s possible that — like many of Trump’s other changes to the White House — the destruction of the bunker was motivated by aesthetic rather than practical reasons.

The construction project is troubling for reasons beyond the fact that it uproots a historic landmark — it is being financed by private corporate funding, leading to extreme conflicts of interest from companies and individuals who seek to curry favor with the administration.

Notably, Trump has declared dubious “national emergencies” throughout his presidency to circumvent congressional approval. In order to justify implementing dozens of tariffs on imports from foreign countries, for example, he declared an economic “emergency.” The U.S. Supreme Court is currently weighing whether some of Trump’s tariffs are legal, given that the declaration was made in the absence of any legitimate emergency.