Trump administration tells Supreme Court that ballroom construction must go on despite order to stop, citing recent missile threat on Air Force One
President Donald Trump’s administration on Friday asked the U.S.
Supreme Court to allow the White House to continue construction on its $400 million ballroom project while it appeals a lower court’s order to halt the work.
Trump’s solicitor general petitioned the high court to suspend last week’s decision by a three-judge panel from the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Chief Justice John Roberts set a deadline of Tuesday for a response by plaintiffs challenging the ballroom project.
The divided appeals court panel ruled last week Trump must stop the White House ballroom’s construction because Congress has not approved the project.
The panel’s majority said Trump doesn’t have the unilateral authority to build a 90,000-square-foot (8,400-square-meter) ballroom where the White House’s East Wing stood before he ordered its demolition last fall.
The lower court suspended its own ruling for two weeks to give Trump’s Republican administration time to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Solicitor General D.
John Sauer asked the Supreme Court to rule on its stay petition before the appeals court panel’s decision takes effect on Aug.
21.
“This case involves an extraordinary and unlawful injunction that will halt the ongoing construction of the integrated military complex, including a totally secure ballroom space, at the East Wing of the White House, which is vitally required by national security,” Sauer wrote.
Friday’s court filing includes the administration’s first confirmation that a threatened missile attack on Air Force One prompted the Secret Service to secretly fly Trump out of Turkey last month on an alternate military aircraft.
In arguing for the need for a secure ballroom space, the filing cites “the threat of a missile attack against Air Force One on July 8” in a list of recent assassination attempts against Trump.
5News aggregated this summary from the outlet’s public feed. The full article, with all the context, is on fortune.com — the content belongs to Fortune.