• Secret Service deputy director claims construction meets security requirements for presidential protection
• Administration offers classified briefing to judge but refuses to disclose details to preservationists
• Court hearing scheduled Tuesday as lawsuit challenges $300 million project’s legality

WASHINGTON, DC (TDR) — The Trump administration invoked national security concerns in a Monday court filing defending President Donald Trump’s controversial White House ballroom construction, arguing that work on the $300 million project must continue to meet Secret Service safety requirements. The 36-page filing responds to a lawsuit seeking to halt the project until it undergoes federal reviews and congressional approval.

Security Claims Remain Classified

Matthew Quinn, deputy director of the U.S. Secret Service, declared in court documents that additional work at the former East Wing site is necessary to satisfy the agency’s “safety and security requirements” for protecting the president. The filing did not explain specific national security concerns, instead offering to share classified details with the judge during a private in-person session without plaintiffs present.

The East Wing previously sat atop an emergency operations bunker designed for presidential protection. Quinn stated that even temporary construction halts would “consequently hamper” the Secret Service’s ability to fulfill its statutory obligations and protective mission.

Construction Timeline Revealed

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10

Court filings provide the most comprehensive look yet at the ballroom project’s scope and timeline. John Stanwich, the National Park Service’s White House liaison, disclosed that below-ground work continues at the site, with foundation construction scheduled to begin in January. Above-ground construction is not anticipated until April 2026 at the earliest, according to the documents.

“No president is legally allowed to tear down portions of the White House without any review whatsoever — not President Trump, not President Biden, and not anyone else.”

The filings acknowledge that final ballroom plans remain incomplete despite ongoing demolition and site preparation work. The privately funded 90,000-square-foot structure would accommodate approximately 1,000 people and is expected to be completed before Trump’s term ends in January 2029.

Legal Battle Over Historic Preservation

The National Trust for Historic Preservation filed suit Friday asking a federal judge to block the project until it completes comprehensive design reviews, environmental assessments, public comment periods, and receives congressional ratification. The preservationist group argues the administration violated federal law by demolishing the East Wing in October without submitting plans to required oversight bodies.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE THE DUPREE REPORT

The Trust contacted the National Capital Planning Commission, Commission of Fine Arts, National Park Service, and other entities on October 21 after demolition began, urging the project’s suspension and requesting compliance with federal statutes. The organization reports receiving no response to its concerns.

Administration’s Defense Strategy

Government lawyers contend the National Trust lacks standing to sue and cannot establish irreparable harm since above-ground construction remains months away. The filing argues that consultations with planning and fine arts commissions “will soon be underway” without court involvement.

The administration asserts the Trust must overcome multiple legal barriers including mootness, ripeness, and lack of standing before meeting requirements for preliminary injunctive relief. A federal court hearing on the matter is scheduled for Tuesday in Washington.

Trump has defended the project by noting presidents before him desired larger event spaces than currently available at the White House. He argues the ballroom would eliminate the practice of entertaining foreign dignitaries in temporary pavilions erected on the south grounds. The privately funded project has drawn criticism from historic preservation and architectural communities alongside political opponents.

Can the administration’s national security claims withstand judicial scrutiny when specific security concerns remain classified and unavailable to the plaintiffs challenging the project?

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10