In a 35-page opinion, Judge Leon wrote that Mr. Trump likely did not have the authority to act without consulting Congress to replace entire sections of the White House — changes that could endure for generations.
We're told there are 19 exclamation points in the opinion.
From Trump's response at Truth Social:
[A]ll I am doing is fixing, cleaning, running, and “sprucing up” a terribly maintained, for many years, Building, but a Building of potentially great importance. Yet, The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a Radical Left Group of Lunatics whose funding was stopped by Congress in 2005, is not suing the Federal Reserve for a Building which has been decimated and destroyed, inside and out, by an incompetent and possibly corrupt Fed Chairman. The once magnificent Building is BILLIONS over budget, may never be completed, and may never open. All of the beautiful walls inside have been ripped down, never to be built again, but the National “Trust” for Historic Preservation never did anything about it! Or, have they sued on Governor Gavin Newscum’s “RAILROAD TO NOWHERE” in California that is BILLIONS over Budget and, probably, will never open or be used. So, the White House Ballroom, and The Trump Kennedy Center, which are under budget, ahead of schedule, and will be among the most magnificent Buildings of their kind anywhere in the World, gets sued by a group that was cut off by Government years ago, but all of the many DISASTERS in our Country are left alone to die. Doesn’t make much sense, does it? President DONALD J. TRUMP
Posts
87 comments:
Fuck that judge and all the other activists in robes!
The Executive Branch needs permission from the Legislative Branch on what it can do with the White House? How much authority is given to Congress? Can the President move around furniture, or does that require Congressional authority too?
Trump 47 = aggressive, structured testing of the limits of executive authority. All part of the plan from day one. Throw it against the wall and see what sticks.
The old (tiny) East Wing is gone. DC always adds a huge underground lair to any new building, but they bicker endlessly about above-ground changes.
Also,
"A federal judge ruled [Tuesday] that President Donald Trump’s executive order last year to end funding for PBS and NPR public media violated the First Amendment."
Judge leon is over his skis again
Step 1. Find a sane judge who will order construction to continue.
Step 2. Continue with construction.
When Judge #1 bitches, tell him he's just following Judge #2's order and if he has a problem with that, take it up with #2.
Based on what law?
Substitute "federal judge" with "some drunk" and the news makes more sense.
"In a 35-page opinion, Judge Leon wrote that Mr. Trump likely did not have the authority to act without consulting Congress..."
"Likely"? Well, I'm convinced.
I am not sure how the Trust even has standing off the top of my head. I guess I'll have to read that part . . . .
This strikes me as outside the authority of the judiciary…
Trump made NPR and PBS speech free.
I skimmed it; standing is mentioned as having been decided in an earlier order, but I am not going hunting for it. I am assuming it is like the plaintiffs in off-shore drilling cases who allege that it might interfere with their "enjoyment of the ocean."
There is also some question in my mind about irreparable harm. The old building has already been torn down - no injunction is going to rebuild it.
"Consult Congress" means nothing will ever happen. Consult them how? Will there be a bill? A vote?
Was Congress consulted when Truman had the entire interior of the White House redone? I've seen a picture of the WH with a bulldozer inside of it. Truman lived across the street in a hotel. (And someone tried to kill him when he lived there.)
And did President Adams have to consult with Congress to fix the damage after the Brits burned it in 1812?
Congress can't even pay TSA agents. Congress can't force voter ID. This opinion is designed to pimp and stiff Trump. The Left personally hates Trump. No federal judge would stop a President Harris or President Hillary Clinton.
What's next? Does the President have to consult with Congress before targets are selected for the Iran strikes?
Should be dismissed for lack of standing.
What is “an entire section”?
congress doesn't want to do these things, they want to spend money they don't have on projects we don't need,
this is a long term project, in keeping with the significance of the interval
Truman did ask Congress in March 1949 and they created the Commission on Renovation of the Executive Mansion to address severe architectural inadequacies in the White House. [From Wikipedia] "There was significant debate among congressional committee members considering the project, including many in Congress who were outwardly hostile toward the president."
It would seem perhaps that Truman's Congressional authorization was tied to tax payer funding. Trump, on the other hand, is using private funding. So, maybe Congress doesn't need to approve that? I don't know? My question is would the Republican Congress turn down the request to build the ballroom? I would think not.
Does anybody want to square these rulings with the Providence Mayor demanding a privately funded mural be taken down on the grounds it is divisive speech?
"My question is would the Republican Congress turn down the request to build the ballroom? I would think not."
There are 47 Democrats in the Senate who would.
simple irinya zarutska is an unperson, in the eyes of the prog idiot in Providence, and not merely him
It is hard to get a clear and definitive answer but it appears to me that the White House is owned by the Executive Branch of the federal government. Funds to maintain it an renovate can be appropriated by Congress, and this has been done in the past, but I see no reason to believe that Executive Branch can't accept donations to do such renovations or rebuilds. Many of the arguments that Congress must be involved revolve around the fact that management of the site is under the Department of the Interior and/or the General Services Administration, both of which are creations of Congress but that isn't really definitive on actual ownership.
Checks and balances suggests that if the Judiciary wants to intervene on the actions of the most senior element of the Executive, then only the most senior element of the Judiciary, SCOTUS, has standing to do so.
If you Democrats keep my daughter from dancing there I will be pissed beyond belief. That will be personal.
How does the plaintiff have standing?
Now do Obozo's basketball court! Paid for by us i.e. taxed to death citizens.
Let the court enforce it.
"Judge Leon wrote that Mr. Trump likely did not have the authority to act without consulting Congress to replace entire sections of the White House."
LIKELY did not? Why the hedge?
I don't see how the National Trust for Historic Preservation has any standing and the time to avoid irreparable harm, has passed.
What are the checks and balances on these radical judges? Their decisions can be reversed, but is there any accountability for throwing up partisan roadblocks?
So... who, exactly, pays the judges salaries? If it's the executive branch, why can't Trump just stop payment on the checks and tell them to go fundraise? Say that the executive branch paying judges "looks bad" and he "doesn't want to have the appearance of impropriety" so he's stopping all payments to these judges.
LIKELY did not? Why the hedge?
Maybe the project was approved, but most of the project is underground and it's classified.
Did the judge provide a long list of Congressional permission-seeking that covers each and every Presidential modification going back in history, one wonders? For instance, did the original East Wing, which I think was constructed by Teddy, have Congressional approval ? I bet it didn't. I wonder, how does the judge object to its demolition, then?
“because no statute comes close to giving the president the authority he claims to have”. ~ Judge Richard Leon (George W Bush appointee)
Lol. That was a really good line :-)
Once a property developer always a property dveloper
He just cannot help himself
The East Wing, Gaza…. What next ?
It would be cheaper to give him a Tonka truck and a sand pit.
“We're told there are 19 exclamation points in the opinion.”
Judge Elaine Benes
It is far more clear that PBS and NPR public media violates the First Amendment.
The government feeding news to the people? It is intuitively obvious to the most casual observer that government owning and running news media directed at The People is unconstitutional.
The "likely" qualifier is because this was a ruling apricot a moron for preliminary injunction, and a preliminary injunction only has to consider "likelihood to prevail" on the merits; it does not require a final decision on those merits. (I think the judge's assessment of likelihood is wrong, but I'm not the one overseeing this case.)
Craig Mc said...
Substitute "federal judge" with "some drunk" and the news makes more sense.
It's incredibly sad that even with no context whatsoever- this statement makes complete sense.
Sorry, I did not proofread my precious comment properly: it should read "approving a motion" rather than "apricot a moron".
When Republicans put $1 into the reconciliation bill in a couple weeks for the ballroom, it will get approved.
At what point is DC property not the "White House?" There is the house proper, the West Wing (which is only of particular note because of the Leftist jerk-off TV show), and the East Wing, which even after a "significant expansion" was only connected by a shitty hallway. It "served as office space for the first lady and her staff (not a Constitutional Office), including the White House Social Secretary, correspondence staff, and the White House Graphics and Calligraphy Office..."
Oh no, we can't lose the Calligraphy Office! Or is that a fancy term for the Joe Biden Memorial Autopen? At what point does it not count as the White House?
Exclamation points? That changes everything.
I assume earlier renovations were not challenged in court so there would not be any opinion inconsistent with today’s even if there was no congressional approval in the past.
19 exclamation points!!!!!!!!? Who wrote the brief, Dinky Dau?
But seriously, any writer worth a gram of spit knows that exclamation points are to be used very sparingly, otherwise you look like a hysterical mental case, and the power of the punctuation is diminished.
19 exclamation points means the brief can be dismissed out of hand.
Did the British consult with Congress when they drove President and Dolly Madison out of the White House and burned the whole thing down? Asking for precedent to help Judge Leon get things right in his head.
Oh noes did judge leon read the briefs
I like how the legal profession pretends it's not just a bunch high school girls with a thesaurus. You guys spend endless hours and words focused on the head of pin attempting to cover up the fact that in the end, you just throw a rock through a window because you're jealous of someone.
Anyone with a brain and is intellectually honest knows the Leftwing judges are trying to stop Trump from doing anything. And they can find some bogus legal reason to do anything they wish.
But we keep pretending their objective judges looking at the law and the constitution. Will the R's in Congress do any oversight? Of course not. Who's bribing them to do that? No one. Will Roberts and the SCOTUS rein in the lower courts? Of course not. They support unchecked judicial power.
Well its Trump's own fault. No one twisted his arm to put ACB on the court.
"19 exclamation points means the brief can be dismissed out of hand."
On this matter, I can't see a need for even one. Where did he go to school, The Groundlings?
The legal profession is just another in the parade of institutions that Trump has convinced to self-expose as hypocrites and frauds. The institution has no real standards or principles, and apparently no one willing to even try to enforce any.
"apricot a moron for preliminary injunction"
"It's incredibly sad that even with no context whatsoever- this statement makes complete sense."
"19 exclamation points means the brief can be dismissed out of hand."
This judge needs to have a breathalyzer lock on his keyboard.
I assume earlier renovations were not challenged in court...
And any guesses as to why that would be?
Nixon put in a bowling alley. Obama put in a basketball court. Trump should have put in a pitch-and-putt.
Oh my goodness another Right wing hysterical Judge, can you image that punctuation!!!! MAGAS cant take the right wing judges ,cant take the left wing Judges only TRUMPs RANTING... typical DTS =Deranged Trump Syndrome...
I just used Judge Leon's citation regarding ultra vires. Thanks Judge. Big help!
it is not funded by tax payers. Congress? not needed.
The opinion would read better without the exclamation points but it’s a much faster read if you omit everything that doesn’t have one:
He is not, however, the owner!
(ballroom will have "zero cost to the American Taxpayer!")
the principal question before the Court is whether the President has '"stepped so plainly beyond the bounds of [his statutory authority], or acted so clearly in defiance of
it, as to warrant the immediate intervention of an equity court.'" … Unfortunately, he has!
this Court will not be the first to hold that Congress has ceded its powers in such a significant fashion!
Section 105(d)(l) plainly authorizes the President to conduct ordinary maintenance and upkeep of the White House, and nothing more!
Defendants point to "alteration" and "improvement," arguing that these terms are "capacious" and permit the President to "modify" the White House and "make [it] better," including by constructing entirely new buildings like the ballroom. … A brazen interpretation, indeed!
Defendants argue that canons of construction have no place in ultra vires review. … Please!
As Defendants have argued it, so long as the White House grounds are "developed" or "occupied by buildings and structures," …, the President has complete authority to engage in whatever construction activity he sees fit. How grand!
Without question, Congress has not specifically authorized the ballroom construction!
Defendants argue that § 8106 should not be read to constrain the President or limit construction at the White House absent a clear statement. Please!
The stronger reading of this history is that Congress means what it says!
Defendants identify a handful of structures built with donated funds in D.C. and argue that these were authorized by only the NPS Organic Act. … Please!
If I deny preliminary injunctive relief now and allow construction to continue while the case progresses, any eventual victory on the merits for the National Trust may likewise prove to be too little, too late!
the Constitution itself vests authority over federal property, including the White House, in Congress!
After all, the White House does not belong to any one man-not even a president!
Grasping for straws, Defendants call the construction site a "coordinated and managed safety hazard" that has disrupted existing security procedures. … Thus, according to Defendants, any construction delay will undermine national security. Please!
While I take seriously the Government's concerns regarding the safety and security of the White House grounds and the President himself, the existence of a "large hole" beside the White House is, of course, a problem of the President's own making!
Where does this leave us? Unfortunately for Defendants, unless and until Congress blesses this project through statutory authorization, construction has to stop!
But here is the good news. It is not too late for Congress to authorize the continued construction of the ballroom project. The President may at any time go to Congress to obtain express authority to construct a ballroom and to do so with private funds. Indeed, Congress may even choose to appropriate funds for the ballroom, or at least decide that some other funding scheme is acceptable. Either way, Congress will thereby retain its authority over the nation's property and its oversight over the Government's spending. The National Trust's interests in a constitutional and lawful process will be vindicated. And the American people will benefit from the branches of Government exercising their constitutionally prescribed roles. Not a bad outcome, that!
"Judge" Leon is a joke.
I'm curious as to how far this will have to go to get reversed.
According to the National Trust, one of its members, Professor Alison Hoagland, is a longtime D.C. resident and a professor of historic preservation who regularly visits President's Park to "enjoy the historic buildings" and take in "the beauty of the L'Enfant Plan." Deel. of Alison K. Hoagland ("Hoagland Deel.") [Dkt. #2-3] ,r 9. Hoagland also gives walking tours and has published scholarly articles on Washington's historic architecture, to which the White House is central. Id. ,r 8. Hoagland alleges that construction of "a ballroom of the proposed form and scale" would cause "permanent and irreparable harm to the White House and President's Park," thereby damaging her own "aesthetic, cultural, and historical interests."
Sorry, that does not give you standing to sue, and any "judge" who claims it does is establishing that he's a pathetic joke.
I would think in these days where drones are becoming a major threat, that having a drone proof room for dinners/meetings inside instead of holding them outside under flimsy tents in the garden would be a top priority.
and upgrading the World War II bomb shelter under the building is probably needed too.
Is the entire gaggle of Federal District judges infested with TDS? A case can be made to sack them all and start over.
Yancey Ward said...
Many of the arguments that Congress must be involved revolve around the fact that management of the site is under the Department of the Interior and/or the General Services Administration, both of which are creations of Congress
Um, no.
Both are part of the Executive Branch, whose heads report to the President.
Congress has no say, other than to appropriate money for renovations, or refuse to do so.
Since Trump isn't spending public $$s, Congress gets no vote, and neither does Professor Alison Hoagland, member of the National Trust.
So the executive branch is not allowed to alter a federal building without explicit permission from Congress and the courts? That’ll gum up the works.
I’m wondering if this Judge has always had this writing style. Or is it some whacked out law clerk and the Article III judge didn’t even edit the opinion.
My youngest daughter loved the Archie comic books when she was a kid. Practically ever page had exclamation points on it!
"Congress has no say, other than to appropriate money for renovations, or refuse to do so."
Nobody planned for the possibility that someone might do renovations without using public money, I guess.
At this point, NPR and PBS are not Trump's decision. There was simply no money for them in the big funding bill. The judge who claimed he could force the government to fund something Congress had declined to fund was way beyond reasonableness. The trouble is that a single, activist judge can enjoin anything s/he feels like, regardless of standing or other considerations.
Mason G said...
"Congress has no say, other than to appropriate money for renovations, or refuse to do so."
Nobody planned for the possibility that someone might do renovations without using public money, I guess.
Or, until TDS came along, nobody cared
Judge Leon is just making sure that the finest traditions of District of Columbia are maintained. The building will be over budget by a factor of ten, it will take ten years to finish it, and there will be several work stoppages based on union jurisdictional issues. Never forget the Reagan description of our federal government: if it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.
> A case can be made to sack them all and start over.
Only if the sack is escape-proof.
Kirk Parker said...
> A case can be made to sack them all and start over.
Only if the sack is escape-proof.
And airtight.
Every judge in the country needs to be replaced with AI.
Yesterday.
We have a serious Constitutional crisis. But it's not Trump that has created it.
Trump’s Presidential Library can include a Hall of Terrible Judicial Decisions.
As John McCain once said, “I will make them famous, and you will know their names. You will know their names".
I think I am going to slip in "apricot a moron" with future comments to see if anyone is reading.
If the East Wing gets into the regular DC Congressional Committee process -- yes, it'll be very slow. They also love to put small buildings on the surface and dig deep, deep underground lairs.
See the Smithsonian Asian Art museum -- 1 floor above ground and 4 below.
Achilles wishing death on government officials.
In other words, another random Tuesday at Althouse.
Everyone knows that it's the federal judiciary in charge of DC architecture. Besides, it's illegal for a Republican president to do anything, don't you know?
Where does this leave us? Unfortunately for Defendants, unless and until Congress blesses this project through statutory authorization, construction has to stop!
You comment on a law blog and don’t know about appeals?
Now there is a big hole in the ground. And people wonder why all these big cities are full of stalled projects and dreams.
Craig Mc for the win.
It's just more corrupt leftwing nazi judicial totalitarianism.
It might have made some sense to issue an injunction before the demolition began, but the horse has already left the barn, no need to lock the door now. But just who would be the decider if federal funds aren't involved? I don't think Congressional approval of the design is constitutionally required. Congress voted money for major renovations and constructions, but didn't approve of the designs.
AI says Congress appropriated money for Theodore Roosevelt's tennis court -- and for his construction of the two wings. When Obama turned the tennis court into a basketball court, money for White House renovations had already been voted, so he didn't need Congressional approval. Private donations funded the tennis pavilion built in Trump's first term.
Note: Jimmy Carter didn't literally micromanage use of the tennis courts on a day to day basis, but he did put effort into setting up the schedule and procedures for scheduling, effort that could have been put into more important things.
The ballroom is literally (and figuratively) a cover story for the reconstruction of the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC), the secure underground facility designed to serve as a shelter and command center for the president and key personnel during national emergencies such as terrorist attacks or nuclear threats. FDR built the original PEOC during WWII, it’s been upgraded, strengthened, remodeled over the years, but it’s past time to build something that will withstand modern threats in protecting leadership. The White House Military Office is overseeing construction.
Smart and capable judge... Well done!!!!
Like I said last year, I think the ballroom is being built to conceal a military facility and this plan has been in the works for years. (i.e. before Trump was elected)
Grundoon said...
"I think I am going to slip in "apricot a moron" with future comments to see if anyone is reading."
Years ago we had a problem with upper management going to the usher's station during shows and eavesdropping on the headset feed to the lighting crew during shows. The lightboard operator could see this and would inject the word, "pineapple," into the conversation to give the lighting crew a heads up.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.