Likely Unlawful

The President ordered the demolition of the East Wing of the White House to make way for a new, privately funded state ballroom in its place.  Construction of the ballroom has proceeded apace for the better part of a year.

That construction is likely unlawful.  Pursuant to its plenary constitutional authority over the District of Columbia and federal property, Congress has explicitly prohibited the construction of any "building or structure . . . on any reservation, park, or public grounds of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia without express authority of Congress.  The ballroom is a building or structure being erected on federal park grounds -- President's Park -- in the District of Columbia.  Yet Congress has not passed any law resembling "express authority" for the Executive's construction of it.

The White House is not just any building, and -- when it comes to historic preservation -- [plaintiff] Hoagland is not just any person.  In failing to appreciate as much, the Court misconceives the plaintiff's injury, allowing the Executive's likely infringement of the Legislature's power of the purse and authority to regulate federal property in the District of Columbia to continue.  Today's decision is no victory for the separation of powers.

I respectfully dissent.

-- Chief Justice John Roberts, with whom Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson join, dissenting in National Park Service v National Trust For Historic Preservation (31 August 2026)