Chief Justice John Roberts warned the White House ballroom project is "likely unlawful," but the Supreme Court let construction continue for now.
Page A12From§Eachthe supper edition — 31 August 2026
Supreme Court lets White House ballroom construction proceed; its own conservative justice calls it 'unlawful'.
As it ran on the front
This reporter has covered a great many Supreme Court rulings, and few have been as straightforwardly good for the country as the Court's decision this week to let construction on the White House ballroom continue. Six separate outlets — CBS, the Washington Examiner, the New York Post, Fox News, ABC, and The Hill — confirmed the same plain fact: the justices ruled the project may proceed while the underlying suit works its way through the courts. That is the system functioning exactly as designed. No drama. No overreach. Just a building going up, on schedule, under lawful federal authority, without so much as a...
...without so much as a single justice raising an objection. Correction: one justice did raise an objection. A conservative one. In writing. Calling the project 'unlawful.' In the same ruling that let it continue. That is, this reporter will concede, an unusual thing for a Court to do — greenlight a project while one of its own members states, on the record, that greenlighting it violates the law. But that is not this reporter's problem to resolve; that is a matter for legal scholars, and possibly future litigants, and possibly nobody at all, since the ballroom will apparently be built regardless of what the scholars conclude.…
…(cont) The important thing, and this reporter cannot stress this enough, is that the process worked. The case will continue. The appeals will continue. The construction will also continue, simultaneously, which is either a remarkable demonstration of judicial restraint or a demonstration that the outcome was decided before the paperwork caught up. This reporter leans toward the former. This reporter also notes that 'the Court got there eventually' is not the same claim as 'the Court got there lawfully,' and that distinction is, per the dissent, the entire case. Which this reporter was not going to mention. Which this reporter has now mentioned twice.
In summary: the ballroom rises, the litigation lingers, and the word 'unlawful' sits in the official record of the ruling that let it happen. This reporter stands by the process. This reporter is less certain, by the end of this column, what the process actually decided.
“They tell you the courts are the last line of defense, then the last line signs off on a ballroom while calling it unlawful in the same breath. That's not oversight, that's paperwork. The renovation gets built either way — the only thing under review is whether we're allowed to notice.”
“The Court simply preserved the President's ability to manage federal property without judicial micromanagement — a straightforward separation-of-powers win. That one justice used the word 'unlawful' is, frankly, beside the point. Did I just call the ruling both a win and unlawful? Let's move on.”
The receipts
The court, in a 5-4 decision, rejected a challenge from National Trust for Historic Preservation that was seeking to halt the massive project slated to cost at least $400 million.
The decision all but guarantees the building will be substantially completed before any final judgments and appeals are resolved.
The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 on Monday that construction of the White House ballroom can continue, lifting a block on above-ground work as President Trump asserts the project is necessary for national security. It halts a lower court ruling…
The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 on Monday that construction can continue on President Trump's White House ballroom. CBS News' Jake Rosen reports.
The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a significant victory on Monday by allowing construction of the White House ballroom project to continue, rebuffing two lower federal courts that had ruled against the president. The high…
This page is a back-issue: the story as it ran, receipts as they were. The current edition is at the front.