September 2, 2026

"Trump is going to get his ballroom — even if courts conclude it’s illegal."

Said lawprof Leah Litman, quoted by Adam Liptak in "Trump’s 'Lightning Speed' Outpaces the Courts/In his breakneck construction of a grand ballroom and in many other initiatives, critics say, the president has tried to outrun judicial review" (NYT gift link).
When the ballroom case was argued before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in June, Judge Patricia A. Millett asked... If the government were to move very quickly to bulldoze the Statue of Liberty... was it true that “nothing can be done” by the courts? 
Yaakov Roth, a Justice Department lawyer, did not try to duck the question. “I think that’s right, yes,” he said.... 
When the case reached the Supreme Court last month, the challengers warned the justices that Mr. Trump had “decided to try to outrun judicial review.” In response, Solicitor General D. John Sauer did not exactly deny the charge. He crowed that a 250-person crew had been working 20 hours a day, seven days a week, and that the project, which he said included key security upgrades for the White House, had passed the point of no return....

It's in the structure of things that the Executive has speed as a tool. Remember when Justice Robert Jackson quoted Napoleon — "The tools belong to the man who can use them"?

I see I have a tag "Trumpian speediness." I've used it twice before today:
May 24, 2024, I quoted Trump: "I was doing great, I was sort of like a hot guy. I was hot as a pistol. I think I’m hotter than I am now and I became president. I asked somebody, was I hotter before or hotter now. I don’t know… You have to always keep moving forward. And when it’s your time you’ve got to know it’s your time...." And I wrote: "New York is his town, and — telling stories about building in the city — he conveyed real love for the place. He wanted the people of his favorite city to know he cares and he can rebuild things for them — quickly — like he rebuilt the Wollman skating rink." 
January 25, 2025, after the big fires, Trump was talking to L.A. Mayor Karen Bass: "You have emergency powers just like I do, and I'm exercising my emergency powers. You have to exercise them.... You have a very powerful emergency power and you can do everything within 24 hours." I wrote: "Trump pictures the homeowners rushing in grabbing armloads of debris and heaving it into dumpsters overnight. But don't you need contractors to deliver and pick up those dumpsters? And won't some of those homeowners... injure themselves jumping about in the wreckage? What is the big hurry? But Bass comes across as weak and afraid to take action, while Trump seems commanding and sanguine, ready to unleash the power of the individual citizens who are raring to get in there and transform the landscape overnight. You can do everything within 24 hours."

ADDED: Slowness is also a tool. Courts and legislatures can be used to slow things down, even where they have no power or will to act. Listen to Liptak: "Should Democrats capture one or both chambers of Congress in the coming election, they may be able to challenge the project in court or through legislation." That's a practical plan to use slowness to achieve the end he seems to favor. Slow things down for 2 more years and Trump will finally be gone. Trump can see that, and he's using his power of speed to get what he wants. 

57 comments:

Deep State Reformer said...

Same s*** as when jackie kennedy wanted to update the White House living quarters in the nineteen sixties and Nancy Reagan wanted to update the dining service in the nineteen eighties. The dipshits and pharisees in the press immediately start ed throwing shade on the whole project deliberately not recognizing that these things are for the Whitehouse as an institution of the US government and were for the benefit future presidents , not for their own personal enhancement or enjoyment. Whatever. That's what "democracy looks like" these days.

William said...

AI tells me that some buildings have been completed in the Pacific Palisades but, to date, none have been completed in Malibu. So there you have it. Trump might complete his Ballroom before a single residence is finished in Malibu.....On the other hand, Bass will probably win re-election easily. That's her skill set. No building things. Winning elections.

mccullough said...

Trump moving faster than the Progressive Lawyers & Judges. They are kinda lazy.

JK Brown said...

It pretty much passed the point of no return when they cleared out the debris from the demolition. Then came the fight to who got to define what replaced the old building.

"For if man without tools is nothing, to be unable to use tools is to be destitute of power; and if with tools he is all, to be able to use tools is to be all-powerful."
—Charles H. Ham, Mind and Hand: manual training, the chief factor in education (1886)

The tools were there, Trump just knew how to use them.

Wince said...

Trump is like the Jesus Lizard of The Swamp, outrunning the predatory reptiles out to stop him.

ChrisC said...

The problem for the Trump haters is that they don't have much to go on. Most of the stuff he has done has been a success or popular. So, they have to go apeshit over a construction project - OK.

gilbar said...

how DARE HE!
doesn't this civilian developer REALIZE?
that Government Projects are REQUIRED to move at a Glacial pace?

mccullough said...

At this blog, We Believe No Ballroom Is Illegal

loudogblog said...

The thing about the ballroom project is that the destruction part of the project has already taken place. So it's too late to stop that. Also, hasn't the system worked as designed? If there had been an important, legally solid case to stop the project before it had started, shouldn't they have been able to get a restraining order that would have stuck until the they ultimately won in court? Maybe a part of the system was designed to prevent people from stopping big projects for frivolous, but legal, reasons.

Peachy+2 said...

Ballroom = illegal.

Crime in general - especially violent crime - and fraud-D tax payer theft crime by democrats - all fine and dandy.

baghdadbob said...

Oh, they'll find a a way to tear it down. Code violation, snail darter habitat, Indian burial ground...

They'll think of something.

Aggie said...

Hey it's not fair when he moves too fast for our perfidy !

n.n said...

If not the ballroom, then a conference center that is ballroom-adjacent. Either way, the lawn will be cleared, the portable potties removed, women in highheels and dresses will be equitably accommodated, and the aesthetic charm will be restored.

Mr. T. said...

Just like Biden got his student loan money laundering scheme, even though it was illegal?

Mr. T. said...

Just like the EPA got its extortion racket, even though it was illegal?

Mr. T. said...

Just like Obama and Lois Lerner got their 1st Amendment Rights oppressions, even though it was illlegal?

Mr. T. said...

BTW Liptak- your paper just had to shell out $10 million for defamation. You got your lying smear story printed, even though it was illegal...

Arashi said...

They should just be happy that he is not planning on putting a golden image of himself on top. Perhaps he will troll them with that just to get their blood pressure up. The old structure needed replacing and the US does need a better space to host get together's with foreign dignitaries. So either actually help or STFU and go find a hobby away from the keyboard.

Aggie said...

Coming attractions across the river, cue the Arch Enemies of The Arch.

tcrosse said...

Is there a term in law for an act that is illegal only because we don't like the guy who's doing it?

rehajm said...

...some sensible analysis form the lawprof here, some propaganda from piece of shit Leah. Not one hint of 'the law is very clear' from either but whatever...

Dogma and Pony Show said...

The courts need to get over this idea that their role in the constitutional scheme is to supervise the actions of the executive. The issue with the ballroom project is the lack of express congressional approval. However, if Congress is aggrieved by that, they have a remedy: impeachment. It should have nothing to do with the courts, at least until a party other than Congress can show that the construction violates their rights in a way that can't be adequately remedied by an award of damages.

rehajm said...

...why string along your own people here with hope like this? It's like the Red Sox 'They win today so it will hurt more when they lose tomorrow' philosophy...

rehajm said...

...I suppose it's partly out of frustration Hillary!'s Supreme Court appointees aren't backstopping all their garbage...

Just an old country lawyer said...

It's pathetic to say, but everybody, including the NYT, knows that if a Democrat were building it the reaction from our betters would be gushing tongue baths. Trump hate is all the bastards have left, and it is so tiresome. They would tear it down, realize how much it was needed, and build a new one, uglier and slower as a charge to the Treasury.

ForestwithouttreeS said...

If someone starts to build a house on my land and I don’t sue (because I don’t know) until it’s almost complete then I have no remedy? The court won’t order its removal?

Quaestor said...

Since the Democrats are planning to do mischief by any legislative means necessary, then the Republicans should beat them too it and pass a law protecting the ballroom wing from any interference from Congress without a three-fifths majority resolution to do so.

ForestwithouttreeS said...

Tcrosse - I think it’s the same term in law for an act is legal only because we like the guy who’s doing it.

Hassayamper said...

*****
Is there a term in law for an act that is illegal only because we don't like the guy who's doing it?
*****
"Bill of attainder"

Quaestor said...

"If someone starts to build a house on my land and I don’t sue (because I don’t know) until it’s almost complete then I have no remedy? The court won’t order its removal?"

Aside from the irrelevance of the case given, ForestwithouttreeS is apparently a stranger to the widely acknowledged principal known as adverse possession.

gilbar said...

dogma said...
".. However, if Congress is aggrieved by that, they have a remedy: impeachment..."

and an even simpler thing, would be to just deny funding.
but, of course, THAT would require that there was a buget..
and THAT would require Congress to do their jobs

hombre said...

Even for Democrat this post-demolition squabble is stupid. Speaking of stupid, I see the Chief in a bit of cheesy dictum allowed as how the construction is probably illegal or some such. What a guy!

AMDG said...

ChrisC said...
The problem for the Trump haters is that they don't have much to go on. Most of the stuff he has done has been a success or popular. So, they have to go apeshit over a construction project - OK.

9/2/26, 11:37 AM
———————————

Are you high? His retarded tariffs might be the biggest own- goal in political history. Upon election he had a +12% positive rating on the cost of living. Then he, Retardo, and Nutlick decided to unilaterally saddle American taxpayers with an addition of about $2000 in taxes. He is now - 66% negative rating.

You can trace his decline in the polls to Liberation Day. All because of Trump’s infathomly stupid view of trade deficits as subsidies.

The trade war with Canada will have a major impact on Maine, Michigan, and New Hampshire where there are three key Senate races.

Oh, and Trump’s focus on the ballroom is viewed by most voters as something akin to Nero fiddling while Rome burns.

.

jim said...

"Same s*** as when jackie kennedy wanted to update the White House living quarters in the nineteen sixties and Nancy Reagan wanted to update the dining service in the nineteen eighties."

off by 3 orders of magnitude

Quaestor said...

"However, if Congress is aggrieved by that, they have a remedy: impeachment. It should have nothing to do with the courts, at least until a party other than Congress can show that the construction violates their rights in a way that can't be adequately remedied by an award of damages."

That's why Congress isn't involved directly in this specific case. The Dems found a bogus "historical preservation society" to act as their proxy. The Supremes ruled the plaintiff had no standing to seek that injunction, ending the matter for the foreseeable.

The Middle Coast said...

Chicago’s Mayor Daley bulldozed an airport in the middle Of the night.

Smilin' Jack said...

“ When the ballroom case was argued before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in June, Judge Patricia A. Millett asked... If the government were to move very quickly to bulldoze the Statue of Liberty... was it true that “nothing can be done” by the courts?”

Don’t give him ideas.

Dogma and Pony Show said...

"If someone starts to build a house on my land and I don’t sue (because I don’t know) until it’s almost complete then I have no remedy? The court won’t order its removal?"

If it's on your land, why couldn't you just tear it down yourself? Why would you need to sue?

Anyway, unlike in your hypothetical, Congress hasn't sued or done anything to stop or even object to the ballroom project. The person who did sue to stop it was nothing like the "owner" of the WH grounds, so she had no standing to prevent the construction.

Maynard said...

If and when the Democrats control the House, one of the impeachment charges will definitely involve the Ballroom construction.

hanuman_prodigious_leaper said...

So Trump can bulldoze CourtHouses!!! Etc.

rehajm said...

"I see the Chief in a bit of cheesy dictum allowed as how the construction is probably illegal or some such. What a guy!"

...not the first time he's spitballed publicly about things where a more prudent justice would know to keep his yap shut...

tim maguire said...

"If this thing that hasn't happened happens, then this other thing that also has not happened will also happen and I am angry about it!"

hawkeyedjb said...

Judges have decided that they are in charge of every fucking thing in the nation, but they are no more knowledgeable or useful than the people who are supposed to make actual decisions. The notion that the judiciary is superior to the other branches of government is destructive. It should not be accepted as the default position on every question, great or small.

tim maguire said...

**jim said...off by 3 orders of magnitude**

A difference of degree, not of kind. If there's a line, you need to explain where and why.

Howard said...

It's too bad the Tub of Orange Puke isn't putting in the same level of effort to construct modern steel, rare earth processing and nuclear power plants.

He's a Putz. That's why Bibi knew he would fall for the easy peasy war on Iran.

rehajm said...

"Chicago’s Mayor Daley bulldozed an airport in the middle Of the night."

...in Massachusetts Bill Weld had the Newton toll booth torn down in the middle of the night. I happened to be driving by after a late arrival at the airport and there it was- glorious! On the topic of magnitude, to the leftie Massholes in charge it was an offense equivalent to forty Trump ballrooms...

Maynard said...

Little Howie calling other guys a putz.

Hilarious!

Howard said...

Ouch! That's going to leave a mark. Once again, that's some powerful shit you got there Maynard.

gadfly said...

The new Obama Presidential Center official located
in the Hyde Park neighborhood puts Chicago’s South Side on center stage. The Center serves as a vibrant community hub, including a museum, gardens, event space, athletic facilities, a branch of the Chicago Public Library, and more.

Trump's stupid ballroorm should revamped to simularly benefit the citizenry located near our nation.s capital and it's visitors, renaming the building the Jimmy Carter Benefits Center.

Christopher B said...

The only people I see focused on the ballroom are the ones yapping like ankle-biting dogs about it.

bagoh20 said...

If a sniper were shooting at the President, the courts would rule that he needs their approval to duck. They had no problem approving men raiding Melania's underwear drawer.

bagoh20 said...

"It's too bad the Tub of Orange Puke isn't putting in the same level of effort to construct modern steel, rare earth processing and nuclear power plants."

Deep thoughts, intelligently presented. Thank you.

Mary Beth said...

Because building a ballroom is EXACTLY like bulldozing the Statue of Liberty. Does the Left not see the reason for the ballroom other than "because I can"?

Tearing down the capital building would make more sense. Or maybe a few courthouses.

Brylinski said...

I wonder what the Dems have on John Roberts... something about his adopted kids? Does anyone know? Or does he just hate Trump?

bagoh20 said...

Q: Why doesn't Trump get the FBI to raid Biden's house looking for classified documents, when Biden has a known history of stealing them?
A: Trump is not a Democrat.

bagoh20 said...

I doubt Trump would bulldoze the Statue of Liberty. That's just not his style.
He's got two years left to paint it gold.

bagoh20 said...

Headline Correction:
"WE are going to get OUR ballroom - even if the courts don't want Trump to get credit for it."

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 4 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. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.